When delay not mala fide, right of hearing on merit not to be rejected – ITAT

When explanation for delay does not smack of mala fide, right of hearing of appeal on merit ought not to be rejected – ITAT

In a recent judgment, ITAT Delhi has held that when the explanation for delay does not smack of mala fide or it is not put forth as a part of dilatory strategy, the Courts must give utmost consideration to such litigant and its right of hearing of appeal on merit ought not to be rejected.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
5135 (2026) (05) abacus.in ITAT

In the instant case, the assesse had challenged the order(s) of Commissioner of Income Tax (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”) arising out of different assessment orders passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The ITAT observed that all three appeals were filed delayed by 56 days. Assessee vide application for condonation of delay, stated that a major fire incident occurred at one of the godowns and due which huge financial loss of around INR 6 crore was occurred.

It was submitted that due to the financial loss assessee was under mental trauma and was undergone to serious mental stress and depression and was not able to concentrate thus the appeal was filed delayed.

It was submitted that the delay was neither intentional nor willful and due to the circumstances beyond his control, therefore, it is requested to condone the delay. In support an affidavit reaffirming above facts was also filed.

However, the revenue opposed to the request of the assessee for condonation of delay in filing the appeals.

The ITAT observed that it must be remembered that in every case of delay, there can be some lapses on the part of the litigant concerned however, that alone is not enough to turn down the plea of assessee and to shut the doors against him. When the explanation does not smack of mala fide or it is not put forth as a part of dilatory strategy, the Courts must give utmost consideration to such litigant and its right of hearing of appeal on merit ought not to be rejected.

The ITAT opined that there was a reasonable and sufficient cause with the assessee in filing the appeals delayed by 56 days. Accordingly, the ITAT condoned and appeals of the assessee are taken for adjudication for hearing.

Since, in all the appeals, the assessee had failed to participate in the proceedings and further failed to file any submissions, the ITAT sent back them to the file of CIT(A) with the directions to provide proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• Compensation to borrower upheld as bank did not verify construction progress before loan disbursals to builder
• No timeline mentioned in PMLA to forward arrest order & material in possession to Adjudicating Authority
• Release of seized assets if mandatory on completion of 120 days? Question referred to Larger Bench
• EPFO Extends date of filing of new ECR for the wage month September to 31/10/2026
• Earlier acceptance is relevant evidence in evaluating subsequent allegation of fictitious investment