Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeals were delayed by 4 days, which were condoned. The assessee's appeals were dismissed by the CIT(A) on the ground of non-representation and lack of documentary evidence. The assessee requested one more opportunity to present documents, while the revenue argued that the CIT(A) had already discussed the issues on merits.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had provided multiple opportunities for compliance, yet the assessee failed to present the required documents. However, in the interest of justice, the appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after granting adequate hearing opportunity, subject to a cost of Rs. 2000/- each, payable to the ITAT Bar Association.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication despite the assessee's non-compliance and lack of documentary evidence before the lower authority.
Sections Cited
Section(s) not mentioned
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 appeals filed by the assessee against the order dated 9.7.2025 passed by ld CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-1 in Appeal No.CIT(A), Bhubaneswar- 1/10470/2018-19, Appeal No.CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-1/10450/2018-19 & Appeal No.CIT(A), Bhubaneswar-1/10454/2018-19, for the assessment years 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15, respectively. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, ld CIT DR and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
At the outset, it is found that the appeals of the assessee are delayed by 4 days. Considering the small delay in these appeals, we condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication.
It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals on the ground of non-representation before him with documentary evidences. It was the submission that one more opportunity be allowed to the assessee to furnish all the relevant documents in support of the claim. In reply, ld CIT DR submitted that the ld CIT(A) has discussed all the issues on merits although there was no compliance from the side of the assessee.
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the orders of ld CIT(A) clearly shows that the ld CIT(A) has given seven opportunities as is evident from pages 2 & 3 of the order and there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. However, the ld CIT(A) has discussed all the points in the impugned order. It was the submission of ld AR that as the assessee has not represented before the ld CIT(A), the relevant documents in regard to the claim were not furnished before the ld CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to cost of Rs.2000/- each in the appeals filed by the assessee to paid to ITAT Bar Association, Cuttack and the receipt of the same be produced before the ld CIT(A). Should the assessee not cooperate in the set aside proceedings,, ld CIT(A) is free to take adverse inference and decide the matter on merits.