PURNA CHANDRA SARAB,KANDHAMAL vs. ITO,WARD-1, CUTTACK
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHANMANISH AGARWAL
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.428/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Purna Chandra Sarab, Shree Purna Chandra Sarab, Shree Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Cuttack 1, Cuttack Traders, Bazar Sahi Tikabali, Traders, Bazar Sahi Tikabali, Badimunda, Badimunda, B.O.Landa, B.O.Landa, Kandhamal PAN/GIR No. No.BJVPS 4886 D (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A. Mohan Rao, CA A. Mohan Rao, CA Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 11/11/20 2024 Date of Pronouncement : 11/11/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench
This is an This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 21.8.2024 in Appeal No.NFAC/2014 /2014-15/10294929 for the assessment year essment year 2015-16.
Shri A.Mohan Rao, A.Mohan Rao, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR appeared for the revenue.
P a g e 1 | 3
ITA No.428/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A), NFAC has passed the order dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay in filing appeal before him. It was the submission that as the assessee was not aware of the order of the Assessing Officer , the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated date. In this contention, ld AR has filed an affidavit from the authorized person dealing with income tax matter and prayed that the matter be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Ld SR DR objected to the request of ld AR of the assessee.
We have considered the rival submissions and perused the affidavit filed before us. A perusal of the order of ld CIT(A) shows that as the assessee failed to produce any documentary evidence substantiating his claim for delay in filing the appeal, ld CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Now before us, ld AR has filed an application supported by affidavit that due to unaware of the assessment order being passed by the Assessing officer, which was sent in email.id of the assessee by the person handling in tax matter, the appeal could not be filed within date and there was a delay of 171 days in filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A). In the interest of justice, we condone the delay of 171 days in filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A) and restore the appeal to his file for fresh adjudication on merits after allowing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
P a g e 2 | 3
ITA No.428/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 11/11/2024.
Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 11/11/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Purna Chandra Sarab, Shree Traders, Bazar Sahi Tikabali, Badimunda, B.O.Landa, Kandhamal 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward-1, Cuttack 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order
Sr.Pvt.Secretary ITAT, Cuttack
P a g e 3 | 3
