BASANTA KUMAR DAS,BARIPADA vs. ITO, BARIPADA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 149/CTK/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 May 2024AY 2009-102 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals due to reasonable cause. However, considering the substantial opportunities already granted by the CIT(A) and the assessee's failure to produce details before the AO, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remitted the matter for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals before the CIT(A) were dismissed ex-parte. The assessee sought condonation of delay in filing the appeals, citing negligence of the AR and issues with online notice service. The assessee also requested one more opportunity to present their case.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned and if the assessee deserves another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: MANISH AGARWAL

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty
For Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, ld Sr DR
Hearing: 28/0Pronounced: 28/0

O R D E R Per Bench & 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.

2.

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-

1.

P a g e 1 | 4 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.

7.

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.

8.

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).

9.

In reply, ld Sr DR supported the order of the ld CIT(A).

10.

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

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →