GPT-BALAJI-RAWATS (JV),BELPAHAR, JHARSUGUDA vs. THE ITO - WARD 1, JHARSUGUDA, JHARSUGUDA

ITA 493/CTK/2026Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 October 2026AY 2015-163 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 61 days in filing the appeal, as the Senior Departmental Representative did not object and the contents of the assessee's petition for condonation were not found to be false. The Tribunal noted that the order of the learned JCIT(A) was ex parte because the assessee failed to produce details and documents. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the issues in the appeal to the file of the learned JCIT(A) for re-adjudication. The assessee was to be granted an adequate opportunity of being heard. The principle is that procedural fairness and an opportunity to be heard are paramount, especially when an ex parte order has been passed due to non-production of documents, and the assessee seeks a chance to rectify the oversight.

What were the facts?

The assessee, GPT-Balaji-Rawats (JV), filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cuttack Bench, against an order passed by the ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Ludhiana for Assessment Year 2015-16. The appeal was delayed by 61 days. The assessee had failed to produce necessary details and documents before the learned JCIT(A), resulting in an ex parte order. The assessee requested another opportunity to present its case properly before the JCIT(A). The Revenue did not object to the condonation of delay. The ITAT, considering the interest of justice, decided to restore the issues to the file of the JCIT(A) for re-adjudication.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the delay of 61 days in filing the appeal should be condoned, considering the assessee's petition for condonation. Assessee's Contention: The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay, praying for the appeal to be admitted. Revenue's Contention: The Senior Departmental Representative did not object to the condonation of the delay. 2. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the learned JCIT(A) due to the ex parte nature of the previous order and the failure to produce documents. Assessee's Contention: The assessee prayed that another opportunity be granted to properly represent its case before the learned JCIT(A). Revenue's Contention: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI GOPALAN GURUSAMY

Hearing: 27/10/2026Pronounced: 27/10/2026

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Ludhiana [in short ‘JCIT(A)] passed u/s 250 in Appeal No.CIT(A), Sambalpur/10109/2017-18 dated 30/12/2025 for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Shri Tushar Agarwal, AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 61 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay. The Ld. Sr. DR did not object to condone the said delay. Accordingly,

2 ITA No.493/CTK/2026 considering the contents of the petition filed by the assessee in regard to condonation of delay which are not found to be false, we condone the delay of 61 days in filing the appeal and the appeal of the assessee is being admitted for adjudication. 4. A perusal of the facts in the present appeal shows that the order of the Ld. JCIT(A) is an ex parte order and the assessee failed to produce details/documents before the ld. JCIT(A). The assessee has prayed that another opportunity may be granted so as to properly represent its case before the ld. JCIT(A). This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in the appeal are restored to the file of the ld. JCIT(A) for re-adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/10/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [Gopalan Gurusamy] [George Mathan] लेखा सदस्य/Accountant Member न्याययक सदस्य/Judicial Member Dated: 27/10/2026 RS आदेशकीप्रनतनलनपअग्रेनर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी/ The Appellant- 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी/ The Respondent- 3. आयकरआयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकरआयुक्त/ CIT 5. ववभागीयप्रवतवनवि, आयकरअपीलीयअविकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्डफाईल / Guard file.

3 ITA No.493/CTK/2026

सत्यावपतप्रवत //True Copy//

आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →