PRADYUMNA KUMAR NANDA,ANGUL vs. ITO, DELHI

Shri P.R.Mohanty, P.R.Mohanty, ld AR, assisted by Shri Om Shiv v Shankar Sahoo (3rd year), intern year), intern University Law College, Bhubaneswar appeared for appeared for the assisted by Ms Karisma Mohanty (4th assessee and Shri assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR assisted by Ms Karisma Mohanty (4 year) intern University Law College, Bhubaneswar year) intern University Law College, Bhubaneswar appeared for the appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 106 days. It was the submission that the appeal of the assesse has been filed on 9.2.2022. It was the submission that admittedly, the assessment order was passed on 17.9.2021 and appeal was to be filed on or before 25.10.2021 being 30 days from the date of service of the assessment order and the appeal was filed only on 9.2.2022. It was the submission that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 regarding Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (on account of COVID-19) vide order dated 27th April, 2021 has restored the Limited Extention order dated 6th May, 2020 and held “in continuation of the order dated 8th March 2021, the period(s) of limitation, as prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended till 28.2.2022. It was the submission that the appeal is filed within the said period, same cannot be considered as delayed. It was the submission that order of the ld CIT(A) is liable to be reversed and the issues be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer insofar as admittedly, there has been failure on the part of the assessee to produce all the evidences before the Assessing officer.

In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the ld CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issues are being set aside, it should be sent to the file of the ld CIT(A), NFAC. To this, ld AR submitted that P a g e 2 | 4 effectively, as the details have not been produced before the AO, even ld CIT(A) would have sent back the matter to the file of the AO and in the interest of justice, it can be sent back by the Tribunal.

We have considered the rival submissions. The facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee has filed appeal before the ld CIT(A) within the limitation as provided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 (supra). This being so, it cannot be held that there is delay in filing of the appeal before the ld CIT(A) by the assessee. It is also noticed that the assessee has not produced all the evidences before the Assessing Authority for proper adjudication. This being so, it is held that there is no delay in filing of the appeal before the ld CIT(A). The order of the ld CIT(A) is set aside and the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.