SAIGEN PARENTERALS (P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-5(2), KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1007/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 October 2025AY 2009-10Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAKESH MISHRA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal after considering the facts and circumstances. The appeal was restored to the file of the AO, subject to the assessee paying ₹10,000 to Legal Aid Services within 60 days.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed 170 days late and was ex-parte before the lower authorities. The assessee sought to condone the delay and offered to pay a cost of ₹10,000 for non-appearance.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the matter should be restored to the file of the AO with a cost.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

For Appellant: Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, AR
For Respondent: Shri Praveen Kishore, DR
Hearing: 27.10.2025Pronounced: 27.10.2025

(Assessment Year: 2009-10) Saigen Parenterals Private ITO, Ward 5(2) Limited Aaykar Bhawan, P-7, 9/12 Lal bazar Street, Mercantile Chowringhee Square, Vs. Building Room No.10, 3 rd Floor, Kolkata-700069 Kolkata-700001, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AADCK4782D Assessee by : Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, AR Revenue by : Shri Praveen Kishore, DR Date of hearing: 27.10.2025 Date of pronouncement: 27.10.2025 O R D E R

PER GEORGE MATHAN, JM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [the learned CIT (A)] in appeal no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1049531904(1) dated 08.02.2023for the A.Y. 2009-10.

2.

Shri Pranabesh Sarkar represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Praveen Kishore represented on behalf of the Revenue.

3.

The appeal of the assessee is time barred by 170 days. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that there is plausible reason to condone the delay and the delay of filing the appeal is hereby condoned.

4.

The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that ex- parte order has been passed by both the lower authorities. The ld. counsel for the assessee vide letter dated 27.10.2025 submitted that the assessee is willing to pay cost of ₹10,000/- for no appearance before both the lower authorities, which reads as under: -

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.10.2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →