SOUMYA PAUL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 37(1), , KOLKATA

It was submitted by the ld. Sr. DR that the assessee was unable to produce any details either before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings or before the ld.CIT(A) in the appellate proceedings. It was also submitted by ld. Sr. DR that he supports the orders of the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. AO.

A perusal of impugned order passed by the Id. CIT(A), shows that the assessee has neither cooperated in the assessment proceedings nor in the appellate proceedings. A further perusal of the impugned order shows that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on 2 ITANo.961/KOL/2025 account of delay, whereas the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) has stated that the assessment order served on the assessee after a period of 164 days and therefore, the assessee could not file the appeal with the prescribed time limit. In such circumstances, in the interest of justice, I condone the delay of 164 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) and 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 pronounced in the open Court on 07/07/2025. (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 07/07/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. 5. ववभागीय प्रयतयनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्यावपत प्रयत //// (