SUBHAJYOTI RAY,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 612/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack04 December 2025AY 2016-20173 pages
AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the 4-day delay in filing the appeal. Recognizing the assessee's inability to produce evidence before the lower authorities, the Tribunal granted one more opportunity to substantiate the claim. The issues were restored to the file of the jurisdictional Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, ensuring the assessee receives adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year 2016-17, which was delayed by 4 days. The Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte, allegedly without considering the details provided by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A) was justified, and if the assessee should be granted a further opportunity to present evidence to substantiate their claim before the Assessing Officer.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

Pronounced: 04/12/2025

O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi dated 26.08.2024 for the assessment year 2016-17.

2.

The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 04 days. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we condone the delay of 04 days in filing the present appeal and proceed to dispose off the matter finally.

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 submission that the assessee had provided the details before the ld.CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) without considering the same, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the 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.

4.

In reply, ld Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A).

5.

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. However, the ld. AR submitted that the details have been provided before both the authorities below but no evidence to that effect is available. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, as the assessee has shown his inability to produce evidence in regard to his claim before both the authorities, therefore, we grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate his claim before the jurisdictional AO by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →