Abhishek Grover Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)
CIT(A) Can’t Decide Merits Without First Condoning Delay- ITAT Delhi Remands Crypto Closing-Stock Case
Delhi ITAT ‘A’ Bench in Abhishek Grover vs ITO, Hisar (ITA No.4304/Del/2024, AY 2018-19, order dated 23-12-2025) set aside the CIT(A)’s order and remanded the matter, holding that deciding an appeal on merits without first condoning the delay is illegal.
Assessee’s appeal before CIT(A) was dismissed as time-barred (delay of 139 days), yet CIT(A) simultaneously dealt with merits, including addition of ₹11.05 lakh towards closing stock of cryptocurrency. Notably, CIT(A) had granted time up to 01-08-2024 for written submissions but passed the order on 30-07-2024, i.e., before the expiry of the granted time.
ITAT held that condonation of delay is a jurisdictional pre-condition. Without condoning delay, CIT(A) could not have entered into merits at all. Further, passing the order before the last date allowed for submissions violated principles of natural justice.
Accordingly, ITAT set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to CIT(A) with a direction to first decide the issue of condonation of delay and thereafter adjudicate the appeal on merits after granting proper opportunity to the assessee. Appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
Key takeaway: Limitation first, merits later—CIT(A) must condone delay before adjudication, and cannot pre-empt the hearing timeline fixed by himself
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
