DEEPAK DUDEJA,GURGAON V. ASSESSING OFFICER, DELHI

ITA 3228/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Deepak Dudeja against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi, which had refused to condone the delay in filing an appeal against the assessment order for the year 2014-15. The original assessment was made on 19.03.2022, and the appeal to CIT(A) was filed on 26.04.2022. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to the delay, citing insufficient justification. The Tribunal, upon review, found that the assessee had indeed provided explanations for the delay that were beyond his control, and thus, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, prioritizing substantial justice over procedural technicalities.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793737 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 15-05-2025
• 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
• Section: 147

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. 3228/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year: 2014-15 Deepak Dudeja, EP-6, Ward No. 6, Sohna, Gurgaon-122103 Vs CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABJPD8210F Assessee by : None Revenue by : Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 25.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 25.09.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member: This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1074609219(1) dated 18.03.2025, in proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). 2. Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 3. It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from both the sides that the learned Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3228/Del/2025 Deepak Dudeja 2 CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 26.04.2022 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 19.03.2022 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons. 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 explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his 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 his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3228/Del/2025 Deepak Dudeja 3 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 25/09/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (S. Rifaur Rahman) (Satbeer Singh Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 25/09/2025 *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 "