RAJINDER KUMAR MODI, HUF,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 47(5),, KOLKATA
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष ।
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.521/KOL/2025
(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018)
Rajinder Kumar Modi HUF
C/o Subash Agarwal & Associates,
Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1,
Gibson Lane, Suite 213, 2nd Floor,
Kolkata-700069
Vs
ITO, Ward-47(5), Kolkata
PAN No. :AAJHR 2810 Q
(अपीलार्थी /Appellant)
..
(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)
नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Siddharth Agarwal, Advocate
राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Addl. CIT-Sr.DR
सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing
: 02/07/2025
घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement
: 02/07/2025
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 26.10.2023, passed for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. Shri Siddharth Agrawal, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri S.B.Chakraborthy, ld.Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
3. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 437 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed application supported with an affidavit for condonation of delay stating therein sufficient reasons which are not found to be false, therefore, the delay of 437 days in filing the appeal stands condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
4. It was the submission of the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) without affording sufficient opportunity has dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
It was also submitted that the assessee may be given one more opportunity
2
to represent its case before the ld. CIT(A), so that the assessee could be able to provide the details to substantiate its case for the year under consideration before the ld. CIT(A).
5. In reply, Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the ld. AO and the ld.
CIT(A). It was the submission that restoring the matter to the file of ld.
CIT(A) would be, in fact, giving the assessee a second round which should not be granted.
6. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the assessee was unable to furnish the details as asked for. A further perusal of impugned order passed by the Id. CIT(A), shows that the assessee has not cooperated in the appellate proceedings However, ld. AR before us requested for one more opportunity to produce the documents before the ld.CIT(A) to file all the details as required. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues to the file of Id.CIT(A) for readjudicating the issues on merits after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the ld. CIT (A) in the readjudication proceedings, positively.
7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 02/07/2025. (जाजज माथन)
(GEORGE MATHAN)
न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER
कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 02/07/2025
Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.
3
आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
sआदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER,
(