Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 337 days. The assessee claims the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without providing sufficient opportunity to be heard. The assessee seeks to restore the matter to the AO to produce evidence.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the interest of justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the AO by restoring the issues to the CIT(A) for readjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present evidence and arguments before the tax authorities after a significant delay in filing the appeal.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Joydeb Saha Vs ITO, Ward-38(4), Midnapur C/o Manoranjan Saha Burdge Town Fokir Kuy, Paschim Medinipur, West Medinipur, WB-721101 PAN No. : BUIPS 9294 R (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. : Shri Girdhar Dhelia, AR नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Smt. Pampa Ray, JCIT-Sr.DR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 15/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 15/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 21.02.2024 for the Assessment Year 2017-2018.
Shri Girdhar Dhelia, ld.AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Smt. Pampa Ray, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
The appeal of the assessee is barred by 337 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Accordingly, delay of 337 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
During the course of hearing, it was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate its claim.
In reply, ld CIT-DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).
I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the assessee had neither complied to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) nor filed any relevant documents to substantiate its claim during the course of appellate proceedings. Even the assessee could not appear before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings. However, the ld. AR prayed during the course of hearing that assessee may be granted one more opportunity so that he could be able to produce the relevant documents in relation to his claim before the ld. AO. This being so, in the interest of justice, I grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the ld. AO by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication on merits after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. Liberty is granted to assessee to produce evidence before the Assessing Officer to substantiate his case. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. AO positively.