What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the principle of natural justice and the assessee's request for an opportunity to present evidence, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(Appeals).

The assessee's appeal before the ITAT was delayed by 60 days due to non-receipt of the CIT(Appeals) order and infrequent email access. The assessee requested condonation of delay, which was granted. However, the assessee did not appear for the hearing.

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 evidence before the CIT(Appeals).

Tshering Choden Lachungpa, Gangtok vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-(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 06.08.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2017-2018. 1

ITA No. 3257/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Tshering Choden Lachungpa

The appeal is time barred by 60 days in filing appeal by the assessee before the ITAT. However, the assessee filed a petition before the ITAT on 16.02.2026 in support of condonation of delay of 60 days mentioning that due to non-receipt of physical copy of the appellate order as well as non-habitual of accessing e-mails regularly, the assessee was not aware of passing CIT(Appeals)’s order and when accesses the income tax portal for checking the status of appeal in the mid-week of December, 2025, became aware of it. Immediately the assessee contacted with Advocate Shri Siddharth Agarwal for filing appeal before the Tribunal and sent all the relevant documents to him and filed appeal with a delay of 60 days from the statutory time limit and due to this reason, the limitation of time for filing of appeal was expired.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time before the Tribunal. Therefore, I am inclined to condone the delay of 60 days in filing the appeal. Hence the delay is condoned.

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

At the time of hearing before the Tribunal, it was the submission of the ld. Departmental Representative that the

ITA No. 3257/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Tshering Choden Lachungpa 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). Moreover, the assessee did not comply with the notices of hearing. The assessee has not made any response nor filed any submission. It seems that the assessee is not interested to prosecute his appeal. The ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte by saying that as the appellant did not bring out any valid explanation with documentary evidence to confront the decision of the ld. Assessing Officer during the appellate proceedings and there is no concrete evidence(s) on record to controvert the decision of the ld. Assessing Officer. Therefore, ld. D.R. pleaded to uphold the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

I 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. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the assessee was not in a position to file some of the evidences before the ld. Assessing Officer as well as ld. CIT(Appeals). But now the assessee requested to give one opportunity to substantiate his case. Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, I remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any

ITA No. 3257/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Tshering Choden Lachungpa inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him. At the same breath, I 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 22/06/2026.

Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 22nd day of June, 2026

Copies to :(1) Tshering Choden Lachungpa, C/o. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 (2) Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Gangtok, Aayakar Bhawan, Near White Memorial Hall, Bhanupath, P.O. Raj Bhawan, Gangtok, East Sikkim-737101, Sikkim

ITA No. 3257/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Tshering Choden Lachungpa (3) CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi; (4) CIT - , (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order

Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha

TSHERING CHODEN LACHUNGPA,GANGTOK vs. ITO, WARD 3(1),, GANGTOK

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments