KULINGRAM O BELER DHANYAKURIA SAMABAY KRISHI UNNAYAN SAMITY LIMITED,BASIRHAT vs. ITO, WARD 49(1),, KOLKATA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं/ITA Nos.451 & 631/KOL/2025
(निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-2015 & 2015-2016)
Kulingram O Beler
Dhanyakuria Samabay Krishi
Unnayan Samity Limited,
2 Joypur Kalibari Sikra
Kulingram, West Bengal
Vs ITO Ward-49(1), Kolkata
PAN No. :AAGFK 9616 G
(अपीलधर्थी /Appellant)
..
(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)
निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : None
रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Kapil Mandal, Sr. DR
सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing
: 16/06/2025
घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 16/06/2025
आदेश / O R D E R
Per George Mathan, JM :
These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the separate orders, passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre
(NFAC), Delhi, both dated 23.01.2024 & 13.02.2024, for the assessment years 2014-2015 & 2015-2016. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Kapil Mandal, Sr.
DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.
3. ITA No.451/Kol/2025 filed for A.Y.2014-2015 is filed by the assesse belatedly by 331 days and ITA No.631/Kol/2025 is delayed by 328 days.
In this regard, the assesse in its application for delay has submitted that the accountant of the assessee organization was remained absent continuously for which information regarding filing appeal within the due date could not be gathered, which caused respective delays in filing both
ITA No.451&631/Kol/2025
2
the appeals and has prayed that the delay may be condoned and the appeals may kindly be admitted for hearing. Ld. Sr. DR did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and the reasons stated by the assesse are not found to be false, the respective delays in both the appeals are condoned and both the appeals are admitted for hearing.
4. On perusal of the grounds raised in both the appeals, shows that in one of the grounds i.e. ground No.4 in both the appeals, the assessee has prayed for an opportunity to furnish the documents before the lower authorities to substantiate its claim before the ld. AO. In this regard, ld. Sr.
DR submitted that the assesse was unable to produce any documentary evidence before both the authorities below. It was the submission of the ld. Sr. DR that the orders of both the lower authorities should be upheld.
5. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the Id. CIT(A) at para 4
for A.Y.2014-2015 and para 4.1 for A.Y.2015-2016, shows that the assessee has not cooperated in the appellate proceedings. However, the assesse in its grounds of appeal has requested for one more opportunity to produce the documents before the lower authorities 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 in both the appeals afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each in both the appeals by the assessee to the Legal Aid Services, 3rd Floor of the Centenary Building, High Court, Calcutta-700001, within sixty days
ITA No.451&631/Kol/2025
3
from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the ld. CIT(A) at the first hearing. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the ld. CIT(A) in the readjudication proceedings, positively.
6. In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 16/06/2025. (RAKESH MISHRA) (GEORGE MATHAN)
लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER
कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 16/06/2025
Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.
आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,
(