Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 07 ITAT CK 2323

Yield Portfolio Management Private Ltd. vs Assessing Officer, Central Circle -26

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi · Decided on 29 July 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anubhav Sharma, Judicial Member · Sanjay Awasthi, Accountant Member
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
ITA No.1767/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

6 paragraphs · 348 words

O R D E R

PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.11.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A)-25 Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in DIN & Order No: ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1083052695(1) arising out of the rectification order dated 25.02.2019 u/s 154 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by ITO, Ward 27(4) for AY: 2016-17.

2.

On hearing both sides we find that the impugned order has been passed by ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal of the assesse by observing that the assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 28.12.2018 and thereafter rectification order was passed u/s 154 of the Act on 25.02.2019 stating that order u/s 154 income is taken as per Section 143(3). Ld. CIT(A) observed that the appeal is thus arising out of order u/s 154 of the Act and not u/s 143(3).

3.

Ld. Counsel has demonstrated before us on the basis of ground raised in the appeal before ld. CIT(A) and Form 35 and the requisite fee filed before ld. First Appellate Authority that assesse intended to challenge the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 28.12.2018 only but erroneously had mentioned in Form 35 that impugned order under challenge is u/s 154 of the Act. It appears that without considering the merits of the grounds and taking a rational approach ignoring innocuous mistake of reference of impugned order being u/s 154 of the Act, Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesse and ends of justice require giving assesse an opportunity to contest the same on merits.

4.

Accordingly, appeal of assesse is allowed for statistical purposes and issue on merits arising out of the impugned assessment order dated 28.12.2018 u/s 143(3) of the Act in the form of ground raised before ld. CIT(A) are restored to the files of ld. CIT(A) to give fresh opportunity of hearing to the assesse and decide the appeal fresh in the light of aforesaid observations of this Bench.