SHRI DURGA PRASAD SARAF VIDYAPEETH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,BHADRAK vs. ITO(EXEMPTION) CUTTACK, CUTTACK

ITA 608/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack17 August 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delays in filing the appeals in the interest of justice. The JCIT's order was set aside, and the issue was remanded for adjudication on merits, with directions to follow Rule 46A for admitting additional evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were dismissed by the JCIT due to significant delays without adjudication on merits. The assessee failed to present its case and produce evidence before the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeals should be adjudicated on merits despite delays and lack of evidence, and the procedure for admitting additional evidence before the appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Rule 46A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA

Hearing: 17/08/2026Pronounced: 17/08/2026

Per Bench: These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the order of ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Guwahati (the ‘JCIT’) in appeal no. ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Guwahati/10044/2021-22 and ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Guwahati/10080/2022-23 both dated 28/03/2026 for the assessment years 2022-23 and 2023-24. 2. Shri Samir Kumar Parija, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Arnab Mukherjee, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

A perusal of the orders of the ld. JCIT clearly shows that ld. JCIT

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.

Create a free accountSign in

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 →