ANUSHREE GIRI KARAN,MIDNAPORE vs. ACIT, CIR. -27(2), HALDIA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee may have faced problems complying with notices due to the Covid pandemic. To ensure fairness, the issues were set aside to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication with an opportunity for the assessee to file submissions.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was migrated to the NFAC, and during the Covid pandemic period, the assessee claimed to have faced difficulties in filing submissions. The CIT(A) noted that no submissions were filed by the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) due to Covid-related restrictions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE & DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dt. 08/04/2022, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the outset the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, the assessee could not get a fair opportunity to plead before the ld. CIT(A) due to various Covid protocols, which prevented the assessee to co-ordinate with its authorised representative to file necessary submission. Prayer was made to restore the issue raised in the instant appeal to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, after considering the submissions of the assessee.
Per contra, the ld. D/R opposed the request of the ld. Counsel for the assessee stating that number of opportunities were given to the assessee and the assessee should have filed the submissions on the e-portal.
We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessee is an individual and return of income was filed Assessment Year: 2017-18 The India Industrial Mission on 14/10/2017 declaring total income of Rs.24,15,790/-. After the case being selected for scrutiny through CASS, statutory notices were duly served and after considering the submissions of the assessee, various additions were made and income assessed at Rs.81,53,730/-. An income of Rs.26,59,335/- was also held to be taxable u/s 115BBE of the Act. The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). On perusal of the impugned order, we notice that the assessee’s appeal was migrated to the NFAC and various notices were issued during the period 30/12/2020 to 01/03/2022. It is well evident fact that the Country was passing through Covid pandemic during the most of the period in the years 2020 & 2021. This fact cannot be denied that the assessee may have faced some problem in complying with the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A) due to this reason. In the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) has specifically observed that no submissions have been filed by the assessee. Under these facts and circumstances of the case, in the context of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to set aside all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee to file necessary documents and written submissions in support of the grounds raised before us. Needles to mention that the assessee should remain compliant and should not take adjournments unless otherwise for reasonable cause.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpsoes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 22nd September, 2022 at Kolkata. (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 22/09/2022 *SC SrPs Assessment Year: 2017-18 The India Industrial Mission आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant
""यथ" / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु" अपील / The CIT(A)- ( ) 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, , , 6. गाड" फाईल /Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
More judgments on Section 115BBE
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 874/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026