PRAVAT KUMAR PAL,DHENKANAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD DHENKANAL, DHENKANAL

ITA 692/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack20 August 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. In the interest of justice, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for re-adjudication after granting the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT which was delayed by 73 days. The CIT(A) had passed an ex parte order as the assessee failed to produce documents. The assessee claimed non-receipt of notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

Hearing: 20/08/2026Pronounced: 20/08/2026

Per George Mathan, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, VADODARA [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-2/10304/2019-20 dated 17.02.2026 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Shri P.K. Mishra, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Arnab Mukherjee, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 73 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay stating sufficient reasons for

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →