Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 06 ITAT CK 1744

Anil Kumar vs ITO

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 24 June 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member · Amitabh Shukla, Accountant Member
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
ITA Nos.2265 & 2266/Del/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 331 words

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

These appeals preferred by the Assessee against the orders of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the First Appellate Authority or ‘the ld. FAA’ for short) in appeals filed before him against the orders of the ld. Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO, for short) passed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Further details of the orders of the lower authorities are as under: -

ITA No. & AYLd. FAA who passed the appellate orderAppeal No. & Date of order of the Ld. FAAAO who passed the assessment order & Date of order
2265/D/26 2020-21NFAC, DelhiDIN & Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083264999(1) Dated 03.12.2025Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Dated 09.09.2022
2266/D/26 2020-21NFAC, DelhiDIN & Order No : ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1083313098(1) Dated 04.12.2025Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department Dated 27.03.2023
2.

On hearing both sides we find that the appeal of the assesse arising out of Assessment Order u/s 144 of the Act was dismissed as the same was filed with the delay of 1048 days. Ld. Counsel has submitted that the email of the assesse was not operative and further it was only when the physical notices of tax demand have received physically by Somya Garg (daughter in law) partner of the firm matter came to the knowledge and thereupon the appeal was filed.

3.

Though, the ld. DR has defended the impugned order, however, we are of the considered view that where assesse is an individual and a plea is taken on notice of department being not received electronically due to the email account of the assesse, who is an individual not being operative or not being accessed regularly assesse should be given an opportunity to contest on merits. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed for statistical purpose and issue on merits as well as law are restored to the files of ld. CIT(A) to give fresh opportunity of hearing and decide the appeals afresh.