DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION,JHARSUGUDA vs. THE ACIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 568/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack03 December 2025AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryN/A

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the 20-day delay in filing the appeals, finding the reasons plausible and unopposed. In the interest of justice, the ITAT restored the issues in these appeals to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, on the condition that the assessee pays a cost of Rs. 10,000/- per appeal to the ITAT Bar Association and cooperates fully with the fresh proceedings.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against separate orders of the CIT(A) for assessment years 2017-18 to 2020-21. The appeals were filed with a delay of 20 days. The CIT(A) had dismissed the original appeals due to the assessee's non-representation, despite providing seven opportunities for compliance.

What were the issues?

1. Condonation of delay in filing appeals. 2. Restoration of appeals dismissed by CIT(A) for non-representation for fresh adjudication.

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

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv, Shri Ashim Chakraborty, Id CIT DR, Shri Vijaya Singh, Id Sr DR
For Respondent: Shri Ashim Chakraborty, Id CIT DR, Shri Vijaya Singh, Id Sr DR
Hearing: 3/12/2025Pronounced: 3/12/2025

Heard together (8 matters)

ITA Nos.567/CTK/2025
ITA Nos.568/CTK/2025
ITA Nos.569/CTK/2025
ITA Nos.570/CTK/2025
ITA Nos.571/CTK/2025
ITA Nos.572/CTK/2025
ITA Nos.573/CTK/2025
ITA Nos.574/CTK/2025

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : These are appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 31.7.2025 passed by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi for the assessment years 202017-18, 2018-19 2019-20 & 2020-2021. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Ashim Kr. Chandraborty, ld CIT DR 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 delayed by 20 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay supported by affidavits stating sufficient reasons for condonation of delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Ld.Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 20 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.

4.

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.

5.

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 page 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 AO for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to cost of Rs.10,000/- 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 AO. Should the assessee not cooperate in the set aside

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →