Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2016-2017. The appeal was filed with a delay of 251 days. The assessee sought condonation of delay, stating sufficient reasons.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It granted the assessee one more opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, restoring the issues to the file of the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be admitted after a significant delay and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the lower appellate authority.
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 :2016-2017) Jasimuddin Mir Vs ITO, Ward-3 (2), Suri Rukunpur, Kollarpur, Birbhum-731216 PAN No. : AVYPJ 3274 A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) : Shri P.K.Roy, Advocate नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Smt. Pampa Ray, JCIT-Sr.DR 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 02.05.2024 for the Assessment Year 2016-2017.
Shri P.K.Roy, 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 251 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. Ld. CIT-DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay of 251 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. CIT(A) 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. 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. CIT(A). This being so, in the interest of justice, I grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the ld. CIT(A) by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. CIT(A) positively.