MEDONEIKUO SEKHOSE,KOHIMA vs. ITO WARD 1 DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR

The appeal is time-barred by 100 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(Appeals). The ld. CIT(Appeals) did not condone the delay for not furnishing any plausible explanation from the side of assessee and dismissed the appeal of the assessee being time-barred and also by simply upholding the order of ld. Assessing Officer.

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 before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, we are inclined to condone the delay of 100 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 mentioning that the appeal is not admitted for adjudication as it is delayed and not filed within the time limit provided and no sufficient cause has been provided by the appellant for the delay. 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). The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of assessee as it is delayed and not filed within the time limit provided

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 due to insufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal within time limit and without going into merit of the case. The ld. Assessing Officer disallowed the stamp value of the property amounting to Rs.20,75,000/- and added back to the total income of the assessee in accordance to the provisions of sections 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The ld. CIT(Appeals) confirmed the addition of Rs. 20,75,000/- made by the ld. Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Act. 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 ld. Assessing Officer. But now he requested to remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) to decide the issue afresh and to examine these documents. 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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22/05/2026.