BINOD KUMAR AGARWAL,EAST SIKKIM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2),, KOLKATA

Shri Subash Agarwal, ld. A.R. represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Santanu Ghosh, ld. Sr. D.R., represented on behalf of the Revenue.

It was submitted by the ld. A.R. that the appeals of the assessee are delayed by 2033 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay, which reads as follow: AFFIDAVIT I, Binod Kumar Agarwal, son of Late Khachanchi Ram Agarwal, aged 50 years, by religion Hindu, residing at Singtam Bazar, Singtam — 737134, Sikkim, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows-

That an appeal relating to A.Y. 2011-12 was filed before the Ld. CIT(A), NF AC on 04.01.2019 against order dated 28.11.2018 u/s 144/147. 2. That the said appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) by passing an order on 05.11.2019. 3. That I contacted Late V.N. Purohit, FCA having his office at chambers, 4, Chowringhee Lane, Kolkata-700016 through my CA, Yash Arya who had represented me before the lower authorities on or around 04.12.2019. The said CA Yash Arya delivered the relevant documents to him for filing appeal before the Hon’ble ITAT. ITA No. 1927/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2015-2016) Binod Kumar Agarwal 3

That I was of the bonafide belief that my appeal has been duly filed before the Hon’ble ITAT and the notice of hearing shall be received in due time.

That after a considerable period of time, when no notice of hearing was forthcoming, I requested Mr. Yash Arya, FCA on or around 15.06.2025 to enquire into the reasons for unreasonable delay in receipt of notice of hearing.

That after due enquiry, it transpired that no appeal was filed in ITAT and unfortunately CA V.N. Purohit had expired in the month of May,2021. 7.That then I contacted Advocate Siddharth Agarwal of 1, Gibson Lane, Kolkata 700069 on or around 16.07.2025 through CA Yash Arya for filing appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal and sent him all the relevant documents.

That the office of the said counsel prepared the appeal and finally filed the same on 25.08.2025 with a delay of around 2033 days.

That the facts stated in para 1 to 8 are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

It was the submission of the ld. A.R. that the issue in appeals is with regard to whether the assessee is an Old Settler of Sikkim. It was submitted that in view of the Writ Petition filed by the assessee as a Member of the Association of Old Settlers of Sikkim in Writ Petition No. 59 of 2013 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has given directions in its order dated 11.02.2013 and the Act has also been amended with ITA No. 1925/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2012-2013) Binod Kumar Agarwal 4

In reply, the ld. Departmental Representative vehemently opposed the condonation of delay. It was the submission that the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) being 2019, the substantial delay should not be condoned.

We have heard the rival contentions and gone through the records. A perusal of the facts of the case clearly shows that the issue in the present case is with regard to whether the assessee is an Old Settlers of Sikkim. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has decided the issue in 11.02.2013. This being so, perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee shows that the delay was on account of the demise of the auditor of the assessee. When technicality is fitted against substantial justice, obviously technicality should step back. The delay is only a technical issue and substantial justice should be rejected if the issue of the Old Settlers of Sikkim in respect of the assessee is decided by applying ITA No. 1927/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2015-2016) Binod Kumar Agarwal 5

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28/10/2025. (Rakesh Mishra) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Kolkata, the 28th day of October, 2025