Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) which had dismissed their appeals ex-parte. Two of these appeals were delayed by 175 days. The assessee filed a condonation application explaining the delay, which was accepted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had failed to substantiate its claims with relevant documents and provide evidence as required.
Held
The Tribunal restored the issues in the appeals to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication, granting the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard. However, due to the assessee's non-cooperation, a cost of Rs. 10,000/- each was imposed on the assessee, to be paid within sixty days. Failure to pay the cost would result in the confirmation of the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte dismissal of appeals by the CIT(A) was justified and whether the delay in filing appeals should be condoned, along with the restoration of the case to the AO for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
IT Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
O R D E R Per Bench : These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi, dated 31.01.2025 & 14.08.2025 for the assessment years 2016-17, 2019- 20, 2018-19. 2. Out of the above four appeals, for A.Y.2016-2017 & 2019-2020 are delayed by 175 days each in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee has filed condonation application along with affidavit for condonation of delay stating therein sufficient reasons, which are not found to be false. Accordingly, the delay of 175 days in both the appeals of the assessee are condoned and appeals are admitted to be heard along with other appeals.
489, 505 & 558/CTK/2025 3. It was submitted by the ld.AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed all the appeals of the assessee exparte. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the ld. AO to decide the issue involved in the appeals afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate its claim.
In reply, ld Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issue is to be restored to the file of ld. AO, then a cost should be imposed.
We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee could not substantiate its claim by providing relevant documents. Even the assessee was also failed to produce the evidences as required by the ld. CIT(A) and in absence of the same, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in these appeals to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. However, looking to the non- cooperation of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings even after issuance of notices to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A), we impose a cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) each on the assessee to be payable to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack-753014, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.