ITAT Condones 260-Day Delay; Remands Ex-Parte Order to CIT(A) for Decision on Merits

By | November 19, 2025
0 Comment

ITAT Condones 260-Day Delay; Remands Ex-Parte Order to CIT(A) for Decision on Merits

Issue

  1. Whether a delay of 260 days in filing an appeal before the Tribunal can be condoned based on the principles of substantial justice.

  2. Whether the Commissioner (Appeals) [CIT(A)] is legally justified in dismissing an appeal in limine (summarily) due to non-appearance, without passing a reasoned order on the merits as required under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act.

Facts

  • The Assessment: The Assessing Officer (AO) passed a Best Judgment Assessment under Section 144 read with Section 147 for Assessment Year 2011-12.

  • The Addition: An addition of Rs. 84.04 Lakhs was made on account of unexplained investment in immovable property (Section 69).

  • First Appeal: The assessee appealed to the CIT(A)/NFAC. However, due to non-compliance with notices, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating the specific grounds raised.

  • Delay: The assessee filed the appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 260 days, submitting an affidavit explaining circumstances beyond her control.

Decision

  • The ITAT Delhi Bench allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.

  • Condonation of Delay: The Tribunal condoned the 260-day delay. It relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji, which advocates for a liberal approach to condoning delay to serve the ends of substantial justice.

  • Violation of Section 250(6): The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine (at the threshold) due to non-appearance.

    • The Law: Section 250(6) mandates that the CIT(A)’s order must be in writing and must state the points for determination and the decision thereon with reasons.

    • The Ruling: Since the CIT(A) failed to pass a reasoned order on the merits of the addition, the order was set aside.

  • Remand: The matter was remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh on merits after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Key Takeaways

  • CIT(A) Cannot Dismiss for Default: Unlike a court, the CIT(A) does not have the power to dismiss an appeal solely for “default” or “non-prosecution.” Even ex-parte orders must address the merits of the case and provide reasons based on the material on record.

  • Section 250(6) is Mandatory: A summary dismissal without discussing the facts and legal grounds violates the statutory mandate of Section 250(6).

  • Allowed for Statistical Purposes: When a Tribunal remands a case to a lower authority without deciding the final tax liability, the appeal is technically treated as “allowed for statistical purposes” in the Tribunal’s records.

  • Duty to Cooperate: The Tribunal explicitly warned that if the assessee fails to cooperate in the fresh proceedings, the CIT(A) is at liberty to finalize the matter strictly according to the law.

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “G”: NEW DELHI
Shakuntala Devi.House No. 8, Mahiudin Pur,
Kanawani, Ghaziabad-201014.
Vs
Income Tax Officer,
Ward-3(5), Noida.
ITA No. 5709/DEL/2024
Date of pronouncement 05.11.2025

Judgement :- 1762512299-xAzPZR-1-TO