MEENU,PALWAL V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), FARIDABAD

ITA 6224/DEL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Meenu, the appellant, who contested the assessment made by the Income Tax Officer for the assessment year 2018-19. The initial appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed due to a delay in filing, which the CIT(A)/NFAC did not find justifiable. The Tribunal, however, found merit in the appellant's reasons for the delay, which were beyond her control, and thus decided to condone the delay and restore the case to the CIT(A)/NFAC for a fresh decision. The Tribunal's decision was influenced by the principle of substantial justice, prioritizing it over procedural technicalities.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788294 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2025
• 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: MANOJ KUMAR
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.6224/Del/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Meenu, W/o- Prakash Veer, Palwal, Faridabad, Haryana, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Faridabad PAN: DLHPM9866H (Appellant) (Respondent) ORDER This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2018-19, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short, the “CIT(A)/NFAC”], Delhi’s DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079858826(1), dated 22.08.2025 involving proceedings under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. She is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC has refused to condone the delay in filing of the Assessee by None Department by Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing 24.11.2025 Date of pronouncement 24.11.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6224/Del/2025 2 | P a g e assessee’s lower appeal instituted on 03.11.2023 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 22.03.2023, thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light of the justifiable reasons. 3. Faced with the situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed filed her condonation petition before the CIT(A)/NFAC explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his control. 4. 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. Accordingly, the delay caused in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC is condoned and the assessee’s instant appeal is restored back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for its afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th November, 2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6224/Del/2025 3 | P a g e Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated: 24th November, 2025. RK/- Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR Asst. Registrar, ITAT, New Delhi Printed from counselvise.com "