BASANTA KUMAR DAS,BARIPADA vs. ITO, BARIPADA
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
Before: MANISH 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 JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.146 to 149/CTK/20 /CTK/2024 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2008-09 and 2009 09 and 2009-2010 Basanta Kumar Das, Ward Basanta Kumar Das, Ward Vs. ACIT ACIT Baleswar Baleswar Circle, Circle, No.10, Lalbazar, Baripada, No.10, Lalbazar, Baripada, Baleswar Mayurbhanj Mayurbhanj PAN/GIR No PAN/GIR No.ACOPD 0097 L (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty, P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue by : Shri Charan Dass, ld Sr DR , ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 28/0 05/2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28/0 /05/2024 O R D E R Per Bench ITA No.147 & 149/CTK/2021 ITA No.147 & 149/CTK/2021 –AY:2008-09 & 2009 09 & 2009-10 Both the Both the appeals filed by the assessee are directed are directed against the separate order orders u/s.143(3)/263 of the Act of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 25.1.2024 25.1.2024 in Appeal No. CIT(A), Cuttack/10438/2018 CIT(A), Cuttack/10438/2018-19 and No. CIT(A), Cuttack/10439/2018 CIT(A), Cuttack/10439/2018-19 for the assessment years 2008 19 for the assessment years 2008-09 & 2009-10, respectively 10, respectively.
Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared Shri P.R.Mohanty, ld AR appeared for the assessee for the assessee. Ld CIT DR has submitted an adjournment petition stating that as due to some official pre submitted an adjournment petition stating that as due to some official pre submitted an adjournment petition stating that as due to some official pre-
P a g e 1 | 4
ITA Nos.146 to 149/CTK/2024 Assessment Years : 2008-09 and 2009-2010
filed condonation petitions, stating therein that due to online service of notice, consequential orders and non-verification of income tax portal on regular basis coupled with negligence or inaction of the ld AR, the appeals could not be filed. It was requested to condone the delay in filing the appeals.
After hearing both the sides and perusing the condonation petitions, we find that the assessee had a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the stipulated period. Hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeals for hearing.
Ld AR submitted that both the appeals have been passed by the ld CIT(A) exparte. It was his submission that one more opportunity be granted to the assessee to putforth his grievance before the ld CIT(A).
In reply, ld Sr DR supported the order of the ld CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. We find that substantial opportunities have been granted by ld CIT(A) as is evident from the order of the ld CIT(A). We also find that before the AO, the assessee could not produce the desired books of account and other relevant details despite given several opportunities except the appearance of ld AR. Before us, ld AR has prayed to grant one more opportunities to furnish the required details and participate in the set aside proceedings. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the orders of the ld CIT(A) and remit the
P a g e 3 | 4
