Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 09 ITAT CK 6681

Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Rameshwar Dayal Education Trust

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "E", New Delhi · Decided on 22 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vimal Kumar, Judicial Member · Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
ITA No. 6026/Del/2026, A.Y. 2010-11; ITA No. 6027/Del/2026, A.Y. 2011-12; ITA No. 6028/Del/2026, A.Y. 2012-13

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 · 337 words

The applications for condonation of delay of 27 days in filing appeals and the appeals filed by the appellant/Revenue are against separate orders dated 19.01.2026 of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) arising out of separate assessment orders dated 31.03.2023 of ld. Assessing Officer/ DCIT, Central Circle-28, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the AO’) u/s 153C of the Act for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 and A.Y. 2012-13 respectively.

2.

All the three appeals involving similar facts, grounds and issues. So, all three appeals were heard together.

3.

In application for condonation of delay of 27 days, it is submitted that the delay was due to heavy workload in time barring scrutiny cases, appeal effect etc. The explanation for condonation of delay does not smack of mala fides as the Appellant/Revenue has not gained anything by not filing of appeal within period of limitation. Therefore, the delay of 27 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal is condoned.

4.

Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in relying upon judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in case of PCIT, Central Circle-1, Delhi vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 52/2024 even when Revenue has filed a SLP against decision.

5.

Ld. Representative of respondent/assessee relied on impugned order.

6.

From examination of record in light of aforesaid rival contention, it is crystal clear that Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 19.01.2026, by following ratio of Jurisdictional High Court in Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. had held the impugned assessment order dated 31.03.2023 to be illegal. Mere pendency of SLP against the judgment of the Jurisdictional High Court is of no consequence. Therefore, the grounds of appeal being devoid of merit are rejected. The grounds of appeal of Revenue are rejected.

7.

All applications of revenue for condonation of delay of 27 days are allowed and appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed.