ANIL KUMAR AGARWALA,DARJEELING vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), SILIGURI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT
Anil Kumar Agarwal,
Ground Floor, Dhanotia
Bhawan, Nehru Road, Siliguri,
Darjeeling-734005
Vs ITO, Ward-1(1), Siliguri

PAN No. :ACFPA 3408 H

(अपीलधर्थी /Appellant)
..
(प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent)

निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : None
रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri L.N.Dash, Addl. CIT(DR)
सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing
:
07/05/2025
घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement
:
13/06/2025

आदेश / O R D E R

The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless
Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 30.05.2024 passed for Assessment
Year 2014-15. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee even the case was called for second round of hearing. Hence, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off considering the facts and material available on record as well as considering the submission of the ld. Sr. DR.
3. On perusal of the appeal record, it is found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 187 days. In this regard the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay supporting with an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for delay that the assessee has not received any hearing notice through its registered e-mail by the ld. CIT(A). It has also been mentioned that the Advocate engaged for the Tribunal matter did not ITANo.254/KOL/2025

2
advise to file appeal within the prescribed time. When the assessee engaged another advocate, he advised that there has already been a delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal. Subsequently, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 187 days and requested for condoning the delay.
4. Ld. Sr. DR did not raise any objection in condoning the delay, however, he vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below.
5. I have heard the submission of the ld. Sr.DR and perused the material available on record. It is an admitted fact that the Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act. It is also an admitted fact that the assessee was unable to furnish cogent evidence before either of the authorities below. So far as delay in filing the present appeal is concerned, the ld. CIT(A) has not considered the plea taken by the assessee that the delay was occurred due to lack of knowledge about the passing of the assessment order by the Assessing Officer. After considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the delay has occurred not due to negligence of the assessee but it is only due to lack of knowledge about the passing of the assessment order. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in order to meet the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to condone the delay. Accordingly, I condone the delay and remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) with a direction to dispose off the case of the assessee on merits after providing sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, I also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), failing which the ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass

ITANo.254/KOL/2025

3
appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 13/06/2025. (DUVVURU RL REDDY)
उपाध्यक्ष / VICE PRESIDENT
कोलकाता Kolkata; दिनाांक Dated 13/06/2025
Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.
आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,

(