What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It found that the assessee was prevented from filing the appeal in time and deserved another opportunity to present their case on merits. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh decision.

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was filed 72 days late. The assessee cited personal reasons including a criminal case and subsequent travel for livelihood as causes for the delay. The assessee also claimed the first appeal was dismissed ex-parte due to non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case on merits before the CIT(Appeals).

Trilochan Raulo, Girisola 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. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Madurai dated 18.12.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2016-2017.

ITA No. 461/CTK/2026 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Trilochan Raulo 2. The appeal is time barred by 72 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal. However, the assessee filed a petition dated 28.04.2026 before the ITAT in support of condonation of delay of 72 days mentioning that the appellant did not receive any information either by post or by e-mail with regard to disposal of the first appeal, which was dismissed due to non- appearance. The appointed authorized representative did not attend the appeal hearing nor informed about the outcome of appeal. Moreover, he was unaware of the e-mail ID of his authorized representative, who was engaged to appear for looking after the taxation matter. Besides that, the assessee stated in his petition that he was charged falsely in a criminal case and underwent imprisonment during the year 2022-23 and 2023-24 and after acquittal he went outside the State to earn his livelihood and for his reason, he could not be file the appeal in time before the Tribunal. He prayed before the Bench to condone the delay.

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 72 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 ex parte 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.

ITA No. 461/CTK/2026 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Trilochan Raulo

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.

We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The assessee did not furnish any documentary evidence in support of his 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 ex-parte without going into merit of the case as the assessee did not respond to the notices issued and not interested in providing any details during the appellate proceedings availing the opportunity under the principle of natural justice. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the assessee was not in a position to furnish 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

ITA No. 461/CTK/2026 (A.Y. 2016-2017) Trilochan Raulo 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.

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

Copies to :(1) Trilochan Raulo, Girisola, Chikiti, Berhampur-761009, Odisha (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Berhampur, Aayakar Bhawan, Ambapua, Berhampur-760010, Odisha (3) Addl./JCIT(A), Madurai; (4) CIT - , Cuttack; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha

TRILOCHAN RAULO,GIRISOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-2/BERHAMPUR, BERHAMPUR

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments