Loading judgment…
Facts
The appeal filed by the assessee was delayed by 586 days. The assessee applied for condonation of delay with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons. The Revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities and suggested imposing a cost if the matter was restored.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 586 days and admitted the appeal for hearing. The issues were restored to the file of the AO for adjudication afresh, providing the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard. However, a cost of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed on the assessee due to non-cooperation.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing the appeal and restoration of the issue to the AO for fresh adjudication with a cost.
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
(नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) Mrs. Jayanti Mahapatra Vs ITO Ward Bhadrak Qtr.No.4 Type-II, C/o J.K.Mohanty, Survey of India Colony, Jayadev Vihar, Bhubaneswar-751013 PAN No. : AOEPM 2327 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Basudev Panda, Senior Advocate & Shri B.R.Panda, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 05/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 05/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi, dated 08.12.2023 for the assessment year 2015-2016.
The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 586 days. 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 586 days in the appeal of the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
3. It was submitted by the ld.AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the ld. AO to decide the issue involved in the appeal 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 appeal of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in this appeal 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) 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.