ITAT Kolkata Condones 37-Day Delay, Restores Matter to CIT(A) for Merit-Based Hearing — Durga Shaw Vs ACIT
Case Overview
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata
Case Name: Durga Shaw Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata)
Assessment Year: 2016-17
Order Pronounced: 15.12.2025
Background of the Appeal
The present matter arose from an appeal preferred by the assessee challenging the order dated 04.03.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17.
At the threshold, the Tribunal was confronted with a preliminary issue — the appeal had been filed with a delay of 37 days beyond the prescribed period of limitation. Before the Bench could proceed to examine the substantive issues raised by the assessee, the question of condoning this delay required resolution.
Condonation of Delay — Preliminary Issue
Assessee's Explanation
The Authorised Representative appearing on behalf of the assessee placed on record the reasons attributable to the delay in filing the appeal. The explanations offered were presented during the course of the hearing, and the Tribunal was requested to take a lenient and sympathetic view in light of the genuine circumstances that had led to the delayed filing.
Departmental Stand
Notably, the Departmental Representative (DR) representing the Revenue did not raise any opposition or objection to the prayer for condonation of delay. The absence of resistance from the Revenue's side further reinforced the assessee's position.
Tribunal's Finding on Delay
Upon carefully examining the submissions advanced by both sides and perusing the materials placed on record, the ITAT Kolkata arrived at the conclusion that the delay of 37 days was attributable to bona fide and genuine reasons. Accordingly, the Tribunal exercised its discretion in favour of the assessee and condoned the delay, thereby proceeding to adjudicate the appeal on its merits.
Key Takeaway: The Tribunal's willingness to condone the delay underscores the well-settled legal principle that procedural technicalities should not be allowed to defeat substantive justice, provided the delay is explained satisfactorily and no malafide intent is evident.