AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal arises from order dated 29.12.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter as “the Act”), by Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-7, Delhi.
In this case, the Ld. AO-CPC, vide order dated 05.12.2024 made certain adjustments to the returned income of the assessee. Thereby aggrieved with this enhancement the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), admittedly with a delay of 87 days. The reason for the delay mentioned in Form 35 was that the assessee had filed an application for rectification u/s 154 of the Act which was pending and therefore the assessee waited for its outcome before filing the first appeal. This reason did not find favour with the Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) who then dismissed the said appeal as “not admitted”.
The aggrieved assessee has now approached the ITAT with extremely detailed, argumentative and verbose grounds of appeal which broadly challenge the action of Ld. AO on merit and the action of Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) in dismissing the appeal inlimine.
Before us the Ld. AR took us through the facts of the case and mentioned that the assessee was under the impression that he could get relief on the basis of rectification application filed before Ld. AO-CPC. It was the submission that it was due to this reason that the assessee waited before filing the first appeal. It was the further submission that later on advice from his tax counsel the assessee filed the first appeal with reasons for delay as has been mentioned in para 2 at page 2 of the impugned order. It was prayed that the delay before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals) deserved to be condoned and the matter may be remanded back to him for adjudication on the grounds of appeal as per Form 35.
The Ld. DR relied on the orders of the authorities below.
We have considered the submissions of Ld. AR/DR and have gone through the documents before us. It is obvious that the assessee has a genuine reason for explaining the delay in filing first appeal. We also find that the 87 days delay was actually on account of pending rectification application which could have settled the grievance of the assessee to some extent. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and condone the delay before the first appellate authority. Thereafter, we deem it fit to remit this matter back to the file of Ld. First Appellate Authority for adjudication on merit.
In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes.