Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 09 ITAT CK 5450

Emergent Builders Pvt. Ltd vs ACIT

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal · Decided on 28 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
M. Balaganesh, Accountant Member · Sudhir Kumar, Judicial Member
CASE NUMBER
ITA 6313/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

4 paragraphs · 287 words

PER SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The appeal in ITA No. 6313/Del/2026 for AY 2013-14, arises out of the order of the Id National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as 'Id. CIT(A)', in short] dated 11.03.2026 against the order of assessment passed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') dated 28.09.2022 by the Assessing Officer, AO, Circle-7(1), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'Id. AO').

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issuance of notice. At the outset, we find that there is delay in filing of appeal by the assessee before us by 3 days for which delay condonation petition has not been filed, despite issuance of defect notice on 04.06.2026. Further, it is noticed that appeal before the ld CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 795 days by the assessee. The reasons given for the delayed filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A) are reproduced in pages 4 to 9 of the order of the ld CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) chose not to condone the delay in filing of appeal by the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the assessee as not maintainable. Since, even the delay condonation petition is not filed before us for the delay of 3 days and the notice sent to the assessee has returned unserved with a postal remark ”no such firm” and in view of the fact that the assessee had not furnished the updated address to this Tribunal, it is very clear that assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. In view of the aforesaid reasons, the appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed.

3.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.