METCAST METALS PVT. LTD.,BHUBANESWAR vs. ADDL/JCIT (A)-1, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 521/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 October 20263 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal considered the rival submissions. It noted that the quantum appeal of the assessee was pending before the CIT(A) for adjudication. Consequently, the Tribunal held that this penalty appeal, which arose out of the said quantum appeal, should also be restored to the file of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) was directed to hear this appeal along with the pending quantum appeal (appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10127089) after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The delay of 63 days in filing the appeal was condoned, as the reasons provided in the affidavit were not found to be false and the Revenue did not object. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, M/s Metcast Metals Pvt. Ltd., filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cuttack Bench, against an order of the Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Hyderabad, for the assessment year 2015-2016. The appeal was delayed by 63 days. The assessee sought condonation of the delay, which was not objected to by the Revenue. The assessee's authorized representatives (ARs) submitted that the quantum appeal related to the same matter was pending before the CIT(A). They requested that the present appeal be restored to the CIT(A)'s file for adjudication along with the pending quantum appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 63 days in filing the appeal should be condoned, turning on the principles of natural justice and the assessee's explanation for the delay. 2. Whether the penalty appeal should be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication along with the pending quantum appeal, considering the procedural history and the pendency of the quantum appeal. Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the quantum appeal was pending before the CIT(A) and requested that this penalty appeal be restored to the CIT(A)'s file to be heard along with the quantum appeal. The assessee also provided reasons for the delay in filing the appeal, supported by an affidavit. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue's Senior Departmental Representative (Sr. DR) supported the orders of the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A). The Sr. DR did not object to the condonation of the delay.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY

Hearing: 07/10/2026Pronounced: 07/10/2026

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-1, Hyderabad, in appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10208324, dated 31/12/2025 for the assessment year 2015-2016. 2. Shri Dillip Kumar Mohanty, Pramita Rout and Shri P.K.Sahoo, ld. ARs appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, ld. Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 63 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for delay. Ld. Sr. DR also did not object

2 ITA No.521/CTK/2026 to condone the same. Accordingly, considering the contents of the affidavit filed by the assessee in regard to condonation of delay which are not found to be false, we condone the delay of 63 days in filing the appeal and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 4. Ld.AR submitted that the quantum appeal in appeal No.NFAC/2014- 15/10127089 is pending before the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication. It was the submission of the ld. AR that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication along with the quantum of appeal pending before him. 5. In reply, ld Sr DR supported the orders of the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A). 6. We have considered the rival submissions. As the quantum appeal of the assessee is pending before the ld. CIT(A) for adjudication, therefore, this penalty appeal arising out of the said quantum appeal, is also hereby restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to be heard along with the appeal of the assessee in appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10127089 after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 07/10/2026. Sd/- Sd/- GOPALAN GURUSAMY GEORGE MATHAN लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER दिनाांक Dated 07/10/2026 RS

3 ITA No.521/CTK/2026 आदेशकीप्रनतललपपअग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी/ The Appellant- 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी/ The Respondent- 3. आयकरआयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), आयकरआयुक्त/ CIT 4. ववभागीयप्रतततनधि, आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, 5. Cuttack 6. गार्डफाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपतप्रतत //True Copy// आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER,

(Assistant Registrar) आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →