SURYENDU BIKASH PANIGRAHI,BALASORE vs. ITO. WARD-1, BALASORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 684/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 May 2026AY 2015-165 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal rejected the adjournment application and dismissed the assessee's appeal due to defects and unexplained delay. The reasons provided for the delay were not substantiated with evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 60 days. The assessee sought condonation of delay, citing the illness of a junior advocate who was in possession of the appeal documents. The Tribunal noted that the delay was unexplained and not condoned.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned. The Tribunal also considered the lack of evidence to substantiate the reasons for the delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253,Section 5

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK

For Appellant: Shri Pradyumna Kumar Sahu, AR
For Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, DR
Hearing: 12.05.2026Pronounced: 12.05.2026

Per George Mathan, JM:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] in appeal no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1078559233(1) dated 16.07.2025 for the AY 2015-16.

2.

Shri Pradyumna Kumar Sahu, represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the Revenue.

3.

The appeal was filed by the assessee on 29.11.2025, with a delay of 60 days, defect memo had been issued to the assessee, which reads as follows:-

Before The Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack. In the matter of: Sri Suryendu Bikash Panigrahi S/o. Ramakanta Panigrahi, At- Flat No. 205, 5th Floor, Sukumar Nayak Enclave, B.C. Sen Raod Dist. Balasore- 756001, Odisha PAN: AKPPP0331E Asst. Year-2015-16. AND Order passed U/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Asst. Year 2015-16, by the Ld. Addi/ JCIT (A)-1, Kolkata -vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/ APL/S/250/2025- 26/ 1078559233(1) dated 16.07.2025, intimated through portal on 16.07.2025. AND Appeal filed U/s. 253 against the Order passed U/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Ld. Addl/ JCIT (A)-1, Kolkata -vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/ APL/S/250/ 2025-26/1078559233(1) dated 16.07.2025, intimated through portal on 16.07.2025, relating to the Asst. Year 2015-16- matter reg. AND Petition for condonation of delay U/s. 253 (5) of the Income tax Act, 1961 read with U/s. 5 of the Indian Limitation Act. Sir, The above named appellant most humbly and respectfully showeth: That being aggrieved with the order passed U/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Asst. Year 2015-16, by the Ld. Addl/ JCIT (A)-1, Kolkata dated 16.07.2025, the appellant has preferred appeal before your honour on today i.e. 29.11.2025. That the Order as above against which appeal has been preferred was received by the appellant through portal on 16.07.2025. That as required under the statute the appeal was to be filed on/or before 15.09.2025.

That on receipt of the Order dated 16.07.2025, the appellant handed over the order and relevant documents/ evidences relied upon to the Advocate/Authorized Representative looks after the case matter and the Advocate/Authorized Representative handed over the impugned order and relevant documents/ evidences relied upon to the Jr. Advocate, Sri Jyoti Ranjan Das to prepare the appeal memo, statement of facts, grounds of appeal etc., in consultation with the appellant & Advocate/ Authorized Representative That, while the matter stood thus, the Jr. Advocate, suddenly fell ill on 05.09.2025 and was advised complete rest by the attending physician till he resumes back on 25.11.2025. That since all the papers including the Order was within the custody of the said person, the appeal could not be preferred otherwise. That on recovery from illness on dated 25.11.2025, the said person prepare the appeal memo, grounds of appeal etc., in consultation with the Advocate & Authorized Representative to file the appeal only on 29.11.2025. That in the instant case, there is a meritorious matter which could be thrown out at its threshold in view of the settled position of law and if delay is not condoned, the appellant will suffer genuine difficulties and irreparable loss. That therefore the delay in filing the appeal was beyond the reasonable control of the appellant and was neither deliberate nor intentional. That thus, there was a delay in filing of appeal by 75 (Seventy Five) days. That the appellant crave leave to add/alter/ amend any of the grounds as urged at the time of personal hearing. PRAYER In the context aforesaid and on the facts and particular circumstances of the case, it is prayed before your honour that the delay in filing of the appeal by 75 (Seventy Five) days be condoned, otherwise the appellant may suffer genuine difficulties and irreparable loss in presenting the meritorious case before your honour on the facts as well as on law. A personal hearing may kindly be extended to the appellant. And for this act of your kindness the appellant shall remain ever pray and oblige. Place: Bhubaneswar Sd/- Dated 19.11.2025 By the Appellant 5. The delay is also been unexplained and the same is not condoned.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12.05.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 12.05.2026 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT DR, ITAT, 4. 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy//

Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata

More judgments on Section 5

All 847 judgments and leading authorities on Section 5 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →