RAJINDER KUMAR MODI, HUF,HOWRAH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 47(5),, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for readjudication, granting the assessee adequate opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal against the order of the CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 437 days. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without affording sufficient opportunity.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A) after a significant delay in filing the appeal.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mehra Mac Industries Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax OfficerTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- Santosh Das And Anr. vs. Union Of INDIACalcutta · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S Rama Krishna Industries vs. State Of Hp And OthersHimachal Pradesh · 30 Oct 2026
- Smt Usha W/O Shri Tarun vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 29 Oct 2026