VIVEK REALTY AND RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,

Before: MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri Kanhu Charan Samal

For Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr, Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR

Hearing: 05/0Pronounced: 05/0

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 JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2020-2021 2021 Vivek Realty and Resorts (P) Vivek Realty and Resorts (P) Vs. Asst. Director of Income Asst. Director of Income Ltd., 403, and 404, 4th floor, Ltd., 403, and 404, 4 Tax, CPC, Bengaluru Tax, CPC, Bengaluru Forum Mart, Khurda. Forum Mart, Khurda. PAN/GIR No PAN/GIR No.AACCV 9838 N (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kanhu Charan Samal Kanhu Charan Samal, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 05/0 06/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 05/0 /06/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld Addl.JCIT(A)-1, 1, Pune, Pune, dated 14.2.2024 in in Appeal Appeal No. No.NFAC/2019- 20,10188168 for the assessment year 2020-2021.

Shri Kanhu Charan Samal, Kanhu Charan Samal, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr. S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr. DR appeared for the revenue.

It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT( It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of non appeal of the assessee on the ground of non-condonation of delay in filing condonation of delay in filing

P a g e 1 | 3 of appeal. It was the submission that there was a delay of 288 days in filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A). It was the submission that when demand was intimated to the assessee by the Assessing Officer and the assessee was put the question in online as to whether he has accepted the demand or challenged the demand, the assessee has mentioned that he has disagreed with the demand. It was the submission that when the assessee mentions that he has disagreed with the demand, the assessee was under the impression that an automatic appeal has been created against the demand raised. It was the submission that it was subsequently only when the assessee discussed with his auditors, the assessee was informed that specific appeal has to be filed in Form 35. It was the submission that thereafter the appeal was immediately filed with a delay of 288 days. It was the submission that the online system was new to the assessee in regard to the disputing the demand. It was the submission that the assessee has a good case on merits. It was the prayer that the delay in filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A) may be condoned and the appeal be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for adjudicating the issue on merits.

In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A). It was the submission that it was the duty of the assessee to be vigilant of its own case.

We have considered the rival submissions. The system of online in regard to filing of appeal etc is new. Mistakes do happen. Technicality like P a g e 2 | 3 delay should not come on the way of substantial justice. The reasons given by the assessee are very much plausible reasons for the delay. The reasons given by the assessee has not been found to be false. This being so, in the interest of justice, the delay in filing of appeal before the ld CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

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

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 05/06/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 05/06/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant : Vivek Realty and Resorts (P) Ltd., 403, and 404, 4th floor, Forum Mart, Khurda 2. The Respondent: Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru 3. The Addl.JCIT(A)- 1, Pune 4. Pr.CIT, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// By order

Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack

P a g e 3 | 3

VIVEK REALTY AND RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU