RAGHAV VANIJYA PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 9(1), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 677/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 September 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 518 days in filing the appeal, finding it neither intentional nor willful. It restored the issues to the file of the Id.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee an opportunity to file revised grounds of appeal and relevant documents. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) for AY 2012-13 was dismissed ex-parte on 09.08.2023 due to unrectified defects in the appeal memo. This resulted in an inordinate delay of 518 days in filing the appeal before the ITAT, which the assessee attributed to not accessing the Income Tax e-portal. An assessment had previously been framed u/s 147 read with Section 144 and Section 144B on a total income of Rs.76,00,450/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT should be condoned; and whether the CIT(A)'s ex-parte dismissal for non-rectification of defects and alleged improper notice service was valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 246A,Section 253(4),Section 282

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY

Hearing: 01/09/2025Pronounced: 04/09/2025

(निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013) Raghav Vanijya Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, Circle-9(1), Kolkata 4th Floor, Room No.4D, 23/1, M.D.Road, Burrabazar, Kolkata-700007 PAN No. :AADCR 6456 K (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 01/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 04/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R

Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM :

1.

The assessee has filed the instant appeal against the order dated 09.08.2023, passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2012-2013.

2.

The appeal of the assessee has been filed belatedly by 518 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application along with affidavit for condonation of delay stating therein that the ld.CIT(A) vide order dated 09.08.2023 has passed an order ex-parte, since the defects mentioned in the Notice in respect of Appeal Memo submitted in Form 35 was not removed/rectified, thereby dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Accordingly, there had been an inordinate delay in submission of the appeal before this Tribunal, which occurred due to the fact that the e-portal of the Income Tax Site was never accessed by the assessee. It is only upon going through the Portal for compilation of the status of the return of income submitted and the demand etc. this came to the knowledge that the Order has already been passed ex-parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee. The contents of the affidavit are as under :-

3.

It was submitted by the ld. AR that the delay was not intentional and, therefore, the same may kindly be condoned and appeal of the assessee may kindly be admitted for hearing.

4.

Considering the submissions of the ld.AR and looking to the facts of the case, we condone the delay of 518 days and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.

5.

At the outset, ld.AR before us submitted that the due to some inevitable circumstances, the assessee could not provide the details as called for by the ld.CIT(A) during the course of appellate proceedings. Accordingly, the ld.AR prayed that assessee may be given one more opportunity to file the relevant documents to substantiate its case before the ld.CIT(A). It has also been prayed by the ld.AR that the assessee may be permitted to file revised grounds of appeal

before the ld.CIT(A) and ld.CIT(A) may kindly be directed to consider the same.

6. On the other hand, ld. Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the assessee was unable to substantiate its case before either of the authorities below. Therefore, ld.Sr.DR prayed that orders of the authorities below deserve to be upheld.

7. Upon hearing the submissions of counsel for the respective parties and perusing the facts of the case and submission made by the ld. AR, we find that the ld. CIT(A) in para 6 of its order mentioned that the assessee could not rectify the defects as mentioned by the ld. CIT(A) resulting into dismissal of the appeal filed by the assessee for which the assessee could not provide the relevant documentary evidence before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. AR during the course of hearing requested for one more opportunity to prove its case by submitting relevant documents before the CIT(A) along with revised grounds of appeal. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in this appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for readjudication afresh after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to file revised grounds of appeal and the ld. CIT(A) is also directed to consider the same. The assessee is also directed to produce all the relevant documents to substantiate its case

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →