RAKAM INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,DELHI V. ITO WARD-21(1), DELHI

ITA 1180/DEL/2025

AI Insights

Rakam Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which had dismissed their earlier appeal regarding an assessment order for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The dismissal was initially challenged due to a significant delay attributed to the non-verification of emails by a director who had resigned due to health issues. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others, emphasized the need to prioritize substantial justice over procedural technicalities and thus condoned the delay. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not given an opportunity to be heard in the first appellate proceedings, leading to the decision to remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775366 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2025
• 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: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHEERAJ KUMAR JAIN
• Assessee Lawyers: MANSI JAIN; MOHAN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"1 ITA No. 1180/Del/2025 Rakam Infrastrcure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI BEFORE S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1180/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2018-19) Rakam Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. F-33/3, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-II, New Delhi-110020 PAN: AAACR028G Vs ITO WARd-21(1), Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee by Ms. Mansi Jain, CA, & Sh. Mohan Gupta, CA Revenue by Sh. Dheeraj Kumar Jain, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 02/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’ for short), New Delhi dated 20/03/2024 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. There is a delay of 272 days in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee filed an application coupled with an affidavit of the Director contending that the Assessee has not verified the e-mail as the said e- mail id was sparingly used by the Assessee. Further submitted that the said e-mail was used by one of the Directors who had resigned on 22/05/2018 due to medical problem of her children. Further stated Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1180/Del/2025 Rakam Infrastrcure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO that due to various medical conditions of the family members, the notice sent by the Ld. CIT(A) has not been verified which resulted in passing of the ex-parte order by the Ld. CIT(A). Thus, sought for condoning the delay in filing the present Appeal. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought for dismissal of the present Appeal on delay in latches. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal. The Assessee in the Affidavit for condonation of delay contended that the Assessee has not verified the e-mail as the said e-mail id was sparingly used by the Assessee. Further stated that the said e-mail was used by one of the Directors who had resigned on 22/05/2018 due to medical problem of her children. Further stated that due to various medical conditions of the family members, the notice sent by the Ld. CIT(A) has not been verified by the Assessee, therefore, the Assessee could not file the Appeal on time before the Tribunal. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1180/Del/2025 Rakam Infrastrcure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that the delay when supported by justifiable reasons, must make way for the cause of substantial justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 272 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 19/04/2021 under Section 143(3) read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 19/04/2021, the Assessee preferred the Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 20/03/2024, dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Assessee preferred the present Appeal. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee vehemently submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has provided no opportunity of being heard to the Assessee and in violation of principals of natural justice, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. 8. The Ld. Department's Representative relying on the order of Lower authorities sought for dismissal of the appeal. 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It can be seen from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) , the Appeal has been passed ex-parte without hearing the Assessee. It Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1180/Del/2025 Rakam Infrastrcure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO is further observed that while deciding the Appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided all the grounds of Appeal of the Assessee on its merits. Considering the facts that the Assessee has not participated in the first Appellate proceedings, in the interest of natural justice, we remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the Appeal afresh on its merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 10. In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 12th September, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (S. RIFAUR RAHMAN) (YOGESH KUMAR U.S.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Date:- 12.09.2025 R.N, Sr.P.S* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 1180/Del/2025 Rakam Infrastrcure Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Printed from counselvise.com "