What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the circumstances. It also directed the CIT(Appeals) to re-decide the appeal on its merits, providing the assessee with an opportunity to present evidence.

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was filed with a significant delay of 749 days, attributed to the death of his authorized representative. The assessee requested condonation of this delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the CIT(Appeals) should re-examine the appeal on merits after the assessee failed to provide evidence earlier.

Manoj Kumar Joshi, Cuttack vs ITO | ITAT Cuttack 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA-CUTTAK ‘e-COURT’, SMC, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(KZ) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Per Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ):- The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 07.02.2024 passed for Assessment Year 2017-2018.

ITA No. 451/CTK/2026 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Manoj Kumar Joshi 2. The appeal is time barred by 749 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal. However, the assessee filed an affidavit dated 27.04.2026 before the ITAT in support of condonation of delay of 749 days mentioning that due to death of his authorized representative Bhaskar Chandra Mohapatra, the appeal could not be filed in time. When he came to know about the death of his A.R. on dated 04.05.2025, he thereafter appointed a tax consultant to file the second appeal before the ITAT, Cuttack and for his cause, the delay had occurred. He prayed before the Bench to condone the delay. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, we are inclined to condone the delay of 749 days. Hence the delay is condoned.

At the time of hearing before the Tribunal, it was the submission of the ld. Counsel for the assessee that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into the merit of the case and simply relied on the order of the ld. Assessing Officer. Therefore, he pleaded to set aside the order passed by the revenue authorities.

On the other hand, it was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that the assessee failed to offer any explanation/supporting documents in respect of the grounds of appeal raised by him before the ld. Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, he pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

ITA No. 451/CTK/2026 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Manoj Kumar Joshi 6. We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The assessee did not furnish any documentary evidence in support of her claim before the ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(Appeals) just simply upholding the order of ld. Assessing Officer dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into merit of the case. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the assessee was not in a position to file some of the evidences before the revenue Authorities and requested to give one opportunity to substantiate his case before the revenue authorities and to decide the appeal afresh on merit. Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, we are of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, we remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) failing which the Ld. CIT(Appeals) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits of the case, based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee in the appeal are partly allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/05/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar) (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Accountant Member Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 22nd day of May, 2026 3

ITA No. 451/CTK/2026 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Manoj Kumar Joshi

Copies to :(1) Manoj Kumar Joshi, Plot No. 306, Mahanadi Vihar, Cuttack-753004, Odisha (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Cuttack, Aayakar Bhawan, Shelter Square, Tulasipur, Cuttack-753008, Odisha (3) CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi; (4) CIT - , Cuttack; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha

MANOJ KUMAR JOSHI,CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), CUTTACK, CUTTACK

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments