SUGYANI KUMARI SAHU,GANJAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BERHAMPUR, BERHAMPUR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). During assessment proceedings, the assessee failed to provide documentary evidence to the AO. Subsequently, the assessee also could not submit evidence before the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to furnish details and evidence before both the AO and the CIT(A). In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the file of the AO for readjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee's appeal could be restored to the AO for fresh consideration, despite failure to provide evidence earlier, subject to cost.
Sections Cited
Income Tax Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi order dated 15/07/2025 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2016-17/10241445 for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. It was the submission that the during the course of assessment proceedings, the AO asked the assessee certain details regarding its claim, however, the assessee could not submit the documentary evidence before the AO. Ld. AR submitted that the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) has filed statement of facts along with grounds of appeal but the ld. CIT(A) without considering the same dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, the ld. AR prayed that one more opportunity may be provided
2 ITA No.442/CTK/2025
to the assessee to represent its case and substantiate its claim before the AO. 3. In reply, ld. Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. AO. It was the submission that restoring the matter to the file of AO would be, in fact, giving the assessee a second round which should not be granted. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the assessee could not furnish the details as asked for by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Further on perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), clearly shows that the assessee could not produce any evidences to substantiate its claim. As no compliance has been made before the ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings, nor the assessee could submit any documentary evidences regarding his claim before the ld. CIT(A), therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld. AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunities of being heard, subject to a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Secor-1, CDA, Cuttack, Odisha- 7453014 within 60 days from the date of this order and production of the evidence of such payment shall be made within the specified time before the ld. AO at the time of first hearing. If the assessee does not make the payment within in the stipulated time or in the respect of the specified amount, the order of the Ld.CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.
3 ITA No.442/CTK/2025
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 26/09/2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (राजेश कुमार) (जाजज माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ददनाांक Dated 26/09/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- Sugyani Kumari Sahu W/O:- Premchand Sahu, AT/P.O/P.S- Polasara, Ganjam, 761105 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- ITO, Ward-1, Berhampur 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,
(Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधर्करण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack
