SANATAN PARIDA,CUTTACK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), CUTTACK

ITA 736/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack29 September 2026AY 2014-153 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), emphasizing that substantial justice should prevail over technicalities. The Tribunal noted that the assessment order was passed ex parte and the assessee had failed to produce details before the AO. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication on merits. The assessee was to be provided with an adequate opportunity of being heard. The ratio decidendi is that procedural delays should not preclude substantive justice, and where an ex parte assessment has occurred due to non-production of details, restoration to the AO for a proper hearing is warranted. The operative direction is to restore the appeal to the AO.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Sanatan Parida, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cuttack Bench, against the order of the NFAC, Delhi (CIT(A)) for the assessment year 2014-15. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal on the grounds of delay, without adjudicating the matter on merits. The assessment order itself was passed ex parte by the Assessing Officer (AO) as the assessee failed to produce necessary details. The assessee sought an opportunity to present its case before the AO.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ITAT should condone the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A)? - Assessee's contention: The assessee implicitly argued for condonation by seeking a decision on merits and highlighting the need for substantial justice over technicalities. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded in the judgment. 2. Whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer for adjudication on merits? - Assessee's contention: The assessee requested an opportunity to substantiate its claim before the AO, implying a need for de novo adjudication. - Revenue's contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY

Hearing: 29/09/2026Pronounced: 29/09/2026

Per Bench: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the NFAC, DELHI [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] in appeal no.NFAC/2014-15/10376892 dated 08.07.2026 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. Shri Deba Prasad Mishra, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. represented on behalf of the revenue.

A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay

2 without adjudicating the appeal of the assessee on merits. I

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 account Sign 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 →