ARNAB DAS,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 46(1), , KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers

ITA 769/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 June 2025AY 2018-2019Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). It was averred that the assessee filed a petition seeking condonation of said delay before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR pointed out that the reasons for seeking condonation were mentioned on page 3 of the impugned order. Thereafter, the Ld. AR stated that instead of hearing the appeal on merit the Ld. CIT(A) passed an order dismissing the appeal by not admitting the same for adjudication. The Ld. AR prayed that the assessee may be allowed an opportunity to plead his case befor2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that while the assessee was not vigilant, the Ld. CIT(A) was not judicious in dismissing the explanation for the delay. The Tribunal condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 478 days, seeking condonation of the delay. The Ld. CIT(A), however, dismissed the appeal by not admitting it, without hearing the case on its merits or properly considering the condonation request.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the condonation of 478 days delay and hearing the case on its merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA

Arnab Das, 29D, Bentick Street, Unit No. A,B,C, 3rd Floor, Kolkata - 700001 [PAN: APLPD6757M] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 46(1), Kolkata, 3, Govt. Place (West), Kolkata - 700001 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Ankit Jalan, AR Department represented by : Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 16.06.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 24.06.2025 O R D E R

PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order dated 11.02.2025.

1.1 Right at the outset, the Ld. AR pointed out that there was a delay of 478 days in the filing of the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was averred that the assessee filed a petition seeking condonation of said delay before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR pointed out that the reasons for seeking condonation were mentioned on page 3 of the impugned order. Thereafter, the Ld. AR stated that instead of hearing the appeal on merit the Ld. CIT(A) passed an order dismissing the appeal by not admitting the same for Arnab Das adjudication. The Ld. AR prayed that the assessee may be allowed an opportunity to plead his case before the Ld. First Appellate Authority by giving one opportunity to do so.

1.2 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below.

We have carefully considered the documents before us and have heard the Ld. AR/DR. We find that while the assessee has not been very vigilant in terms of pursuing his matter, as he is seen to have overlooked the period of limitation for filing appeal, but we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has also not been judicious in terms of dismissing the explanation given for the said delay. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Needless to say, we are condoning the delay in filing the first appeal and we expect that the Ld. CIT(A) would pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 24.06.2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →