M/S. SABITARANI SENAPATI,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARD-3(5), BHUBANESWAR

The appeals filed by the assessee are barred by limitation by 36 days. The The appeals filed by the assessee are barred by limitation by 36 days. The The appeals filed by the assessee are barred by limitation by 36 days. The assessee has filed condonation petitions assessee has filed condonation petitions supported by affidavits, wherein, it is supported by affidavits, wherein, it is stated that the order was received by the counsel of the assessee on 2.2.20 stated that the order was received by the counsel of the assessee on 2.2.20 stated that the order was received by the counsel of the assessee on 2.2.2019 and by that time, his father was suffering from blood cancer and his mother was by that time, his father was suffering from blood cancer and his mother was by that time, his father was suffering from blood cancer and his mother was suffering from paralysis, and, therefore, he was busy in medical treatment of his suffering from paralysis, and, therefore, he was busy in medical treatment of his suffering from paralysis, and, therefore, he was busy in medical treatment of his parents. It was parents. It was in this backdrop that he could not file the appeals in time. After he could not file the appeals in time. After

P a g e 1 | 3 & 116/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-2016 considering the condonation petitions and hearing the parties, we are satisfied about the cause stating in the petition regarding delay in filing the appeals. Therefore, we condone the delay of 36 days in filing the appeals and decide the appeals on merits.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials placed on the record of the Tribunal. On perusal of orders of the lower authorities, I observe that the Assessing Officer without giving proper opportunities to the assessee to provide documentary evidence has passed the order u/s.143(3) of the Act. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee had provided additional evidences without enclosing any application for acceptance of the same. Therefore, the ld CIT(A) did not accept the additional evidences filed by the assessee and upheld the additions made by the Assessing officer.

Now before us, ld A.R. of the assessee submitted a paper book containing necessary evidences in respect of various additions made by the AO with an application for accepting and considering the same on merits as the relevant documents and evidences were not filed before the AO and ld CIT(A) and request to admit the same in the interest of justice as the assessee was prevented in filing these paper. Hence, I admit the same under rule 29 of ITAT Rules 1963.

Considering the materials aspects and documents and the details filed by the assessee, I find it justifiable and proper to restore the issues under assessment denovo to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to the assessee to file all the documentary evidences now filed before the Tribunal and the AO is P a g e 2 | 3 & 116/CTK/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-2016 directed to accept the same and redo the assessment denovo after providing opportunities to the assessee. Hence, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Since, I have restored the issues under assessment to the file of the AO for fresh consideration, the penalty levied u/s 271(1)\(c) of the Act is also restored to the file of the AO with the liberty that if after passing assessment proceedings, if he finds that the penalty proceedings has to be initiated then he shall be at liberty to initiate penalty proceedings and to pass order as per provisions of the Act.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.