DISTRICT MINERAL FOUNDATION,JHARSUGUDA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had provided multiple opportunities for representation and submission of documents, but the assessee failed to comply. Despite this, the CIT(A) had discussed the issues on merits. However, in the interest of justice, the appeals were restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The appeals were filed by the assessee against separate orders passed by the CIT(A) for assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21. The appeals were delayed by 20 days. The assessee requested condonation of delay, which was granted as no serious objection was raised by the Revenue.
What were the issues?
Restoration of appeals to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication due to non-compliance by the assessee before the CIT(A).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
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
Heard together (8 matters)
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.
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.
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 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 →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026