RANJAN KUMAR SHARMA,EAST CHAMPARAN vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT PTN-W-(27)(2) INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 64/PAT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 September 2025AY 2018-19Bench: S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 85 days, stating that the assessee had provided a reasonable cause. However, due to the contumacious attitude of the assessee in not appearing before the lower authorities, the appeal was restored to the Assessing Officer for readjudication with a cost of Rs. 1,00,000 to be paid to the Bihar State Legal Services Authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2018-19. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) and also sought an adjournment in the present appeal. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal due to a delay of 85 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the case should be restored to the Assessing Officer for readjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Income Tax Act

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & RAJESH KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 02/09/2025Pronounced: 02/09/2025

Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ranjan Kumar Sharma, S/O. Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Shyama Sharma Shyampur, Department, Adapur, East Champaran- 845301 PAN/GIR No. drpps 9579 r (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : None (Adjn.petition) Revenue by : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 02/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 02/09/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFC), New Delhi NFAC), Delhi dated 17.12.2024 in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10263675 passed for Assessment Year 2018-19.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. However, an adjournment petition has been filed by the assessee to adjourn the matter to 4.9.2025. Considering the facts of the case, we reject the adjournment petition and proceed to decide the appeal exparte after hearing ld Sr DR.

P a g e 1 | 3

3.

A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(A) shows that the ld CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of 85 days and dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay in filing the appeal. The assessee has given reasonable cause for filing the appeal delay of 85 days. It is also noticed that the assessee has not represented before the ld CIT(A). This being so, we are of the view that the delay in filing the appeal is liable to be condoned and we do so. It is also noticed that the assessee has not represented before the Assessing Officer also. In these circumstances, so as to grant the assessee an opportunity to substantiate his case and considering the contumacious attitude of the assessee, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication subject to the condition that the assessee pays a cost of Rs.1,00,000/-(Rupees one lakh only) to “Bihar State Legal Services Authority, Patna” within 60 days from the date of this order. .Shall the assessee not pay the cost within the prescribed period, the order of ld CIT(A) is confirmed.

4.

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

Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 02/09/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →