Krishan Kumar vs Income Tax Officer

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2017-18 arises against the CIT(A)/Addl./JCIT(A)-12, Mumbai’s DIN & order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1085518561(1) dated 03.02.2026, in proceedings u/ s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “ the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at the asse ssee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

It emerges during the course o f hearing with the able assistance co ming from both the sides that the learned C IT(A) has re fused to condone the delay of 47 days in filing of the assessee’s lower appeal institute d on 10.02.2020 against the Assessing Officer’s assessment framed on 24.12.2019 thereby holding that the same had not been explained in light o f the justifiable reasons.

Faced with this situation, learned departmental representative could hardly dispute that the assessee had indeed explained the above delay before the CIT(A) explaining all the reasons on account of circumstances beyond his contro l.

That being the case, I hereby quote Co llector, Land & Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & O thers (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), settling the issue long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice and restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the C IT(A) for his afresh appropriate adjudication within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the assessee shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accord ing ly.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.