JALADHAR BISWAL,DHENKANAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD DHENKANAL, DHENKANAL

The appeal is time barred by 62 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Tribunal. However, the assessee filed a petition dated 02.05.2026 before the ITAT in support of condonation of delay of 62 days mentioning that non response could be made by the petitioner due to missing of respective text message and emails sent in this regard. However, in course of hearing of appeal in the appellate proceedings, no response could be made due to missing of respective text message and emails sent in this regard. 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 and was unaware of such order and could not take any step for filing the second appeal. 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 62 days. Hence the delay is condoned.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. Therefore, we have decided to dispose of the appeal after hearing the ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material available on record.

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

We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative 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 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 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.

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