RAGHAV VANIJYA PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 9(1), , KOLKATA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, KOLKATA
BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.677/KOL/2025
(निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013)
Raghav Vanijya Pvt. Ltd.
4th Floor, Room No.4D,
23/1, M.D.Road, Burrabazar,
Kolkata-700007
Vs DCIT, Circle-9(1), Kolkata
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 :
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
2
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
4
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 5 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 6 and cooperate in the readjudication proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), positively. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04 /09/2025. (RAJESH KUMAR) (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 04 /09/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,
(