BIJAYA KUMAR PRUSTY,CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), CUTTACK, CUTTACK

ITA 667/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack18 August 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) in the interest of substantial justice. The matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for re-adjudication with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed due to a delay of 109 days without a decision on merits. The assessee failed to present their case before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed before the CIT(A) should be dismissed solely on grounds of delay without adjudicating on merits, and whether substantial justice should prevail over technicalities.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

Hearing: 18/08/2026Pronounced: 18/08/2026

Per George Mathan, JM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi (the ‘CIT(A)’) in appeal no.NFAC/2018- 19/10380365 dated 15/04/2026 for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Arnab Mukherjee, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) clearly shows that ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay of 109 days without adjudicating the appeal of the assessee on merits as the assessee failed to present its

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.

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 →