GIRIJA PRASAD PATI,ICHHAPUR,, SHRIBALDEVJEW, KENDRAPADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICEER, KENDRAPADA WARD, KENDRAPADA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 544/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 December 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 13 days. Considering the submissions and the evidence produced, in the interest of justice, the issues were restored to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for verification and readjudication after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The appeal was filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was delayed by 13 days. The assessee's AR argued that all evidences were produced before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the faceless portal had some lapse. The revenue's DR had no objection to restoring the issues to the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) is liable to be deleted, or if the issues need to be readjudicated by the Jurisdictional AO due to potential lapses in the faceless portal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 142(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

"नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee by : Shri K.K.Bal, Adv : Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue by सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 4 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 4 /12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 14.7.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2016-17/10105563 for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

ShriK.K.Bal, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.

3.

At the outset, it is found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 13 days. After hearing the parties and considering the smallness of delay, we condone the delay of 13 days in filing the appeal and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.

("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ) 4. It was submitted by ld AR that the assessee had produced all the evidences in support of the claim before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer has taken a stand that the details of the claim have not been provided before him. Ld AR drew our attention to pages 14 & 15 of paper book, which is the acknowledgement response in response to notice u/s.142(1) of the Act. Page 18, is the view response to Notice ID 100042952608 u/s.142(1) of the Act. Pages 27 to 32 are the acknowledgement response to show cause notice, copy of the various documents which have been filed and uploaded in the income tax portal. It was the submission that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the ld CIT(A) is liable to be deleted.

5.

In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that there could be some lapse in the faceless portal. He submitted that he has no objection if the issues are restored to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for examining all the evidences and re-adjudicate all the issues.

6.

Considering the submissions of ld AR and considering the fact that the evidences have already been produced before the faceless Assessing Officer, therefore, in the interest of justice the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for verification of all the evidences and readjudicate all the issues afresh after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to produce all the documents as were produced before the faceless Assessing officer earlier to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →