B E CONTRACTS PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI V. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(2), DELHI

ITA 3146/DEL/2025

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793111 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2023-2024
• Appeal Filed On: 13-05-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION BY DIRECTOR

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member ITA No.3146/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2023-24 B. E. Contracts Pvt. Ltd., 11-C, Vandana Building, 11 Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi-110001 Vs ACIT, Circle-4(2), New Delhi-110002 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCB8363M Assessee by : Adjournment Application by Director Revenue by : Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 22.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 22.09.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2023-24, arises against the Addl./JCIT(A), Udaipur’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1074619929(1) dated 18.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). 2. Heard both the parties at length. Case file perused. 3. It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the sides that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 01.03.2025 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 28.05.2024 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of justifiable reasons. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3146/Del/2025 B E Contracts Pvt. Ltd. 2 4. Faced with this situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed explained the above delay before the CIT(A)/NFAC stating all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond it’s control. 5. That being the case, we hereby quote Collector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), settling the issue long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice and restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the assessee shall plead and prove the case at it’s own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 22/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 22/09/2025 *Subodh Kumar, Sr. PS* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Printed from counselvise.com "