DR. SATYENDRA KUMAR,MUZAFFAPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), MUZAFFARPUR
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-PATNA ‘e-COURT’, KOLKATA
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Girish Agrawal
Per Rajpal Yadav, Vice-President (KZ):- The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur dated 30.03.2018 passed for Assessment Year 2011-12.
ITA No. 472/PAT/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Dr. Satyendra Kumar 2. This appeal has been presented on 02.09.2022, whereas the impugned order was passed on 30.03.2018. Thus the appeal is time-barred. In order to explain the delay, the assessee has filed an application and submitted that the assessee has filed a Writ Petition bearing No. 9268 of 2022 before the Hon’ble Patna High Court, which was decided by the Hon’ble High Court on 13.07.2022. Hon’ble High Court has observed that in case, this order is being challenged before the Appellate Authority and this appeal is being filed before the appropriate designated authority within a period of two months from today, i.e. 13.07.2022, the question of delay will not be raised while deciding the appeal. Hon’ble High Court has condoned the delay and permitted the assessee to prefer appeal before the Tribunal. Thus it is being concluded that the appeal is to be decided on merit.
With the assistance of ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. A perusal of the impugned order of ld. CIT(Appeals) would reveal that the ld. 1st Appellate Authority has dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution instead of deciding the appeal on merit.
Sub-clause (6) of section 250 has a direct bearing on the controversy therefore, it is imperative upon us to
ITA No. 472/PAT/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Dr. Satyendra Kumar make reference of this sub-clause, which reads as under:- “(6) The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision”.
A bare perusal of the above clause would indicate that the ld. CIT(Appeals) is required to formulate the points in dispute and thereafter perused the record and record reasons in support of his conclusion on those points. The ld. CIT(Appeals) did not determine the point in dispute, did not record any reason, rather dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, which is not in consonance with the mandate provided in sub-clause (6) of section 250. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and restore all these issues to the file of the ld. 1st Appellate Authority for re-adjudication. The ld. CIT(Appeals) would decide the appeal after providing due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17.05.2023.
Sd/- Sd/- (Girish Agrawal) (Rajpal Yadav) Accountant Member Vice-President Kolkata, the 17th day of May, 2023 3
ITA No. 472/PAT/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Dr. Satyendra Kumar
Copies to :(1) Dr. Satyendra Kumar, Prop. Saraswati Medical Hall, East Gate of MIT, Muzaffarpur, Bihar, Pin Code No.842003
(2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Muzaffarpur (3) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamshedpur, (4) Commissioner of Income Tax- , (5) The Departmental Representative (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order
Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S.
