Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed 133 days late, with the assessee providing an affidavit for condonation of delay. The assessee's previous appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-cooperation and inability to produce documents during assessment proceedings.
Held
The delay in filing the appeal was condoned. The Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the AO for readjudication, granting the assessee an adequate opportunity to be heard, and directed the assessee to cooperate.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing the appeal and restoration of the case for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
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
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 dated15/01/2025 passed in Appeal No. NFAC/2018-19-10329436 for the assessment year 2019-2020. 2. At the outset, it is found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 133 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an affidavit 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 133 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.
Ld.AR submitted that the assesee could not cooperate in the appellate proceedings due to inevitable circumstances, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assesee. It was submitted that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO so that the assessee could be able to produce all the relevant facts in support of his claim before the ld. AO 4. Ld Sr.DR submitted that proper opportunities were allowed and the assessee could not produce the documents as required by both the authorities below.
We have considered the rival submissions. On perusal of the assessment order, it is found that the assessee has already shown his inability to produce the documents as required by the ld. AO during the course of assessment proceedings. A further perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), clearly shows that notices were issued to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A), however, no compliance has been made by the assessee. In view of the above, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the ld.AO for readjudication afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the ld. AO in the readjudication proceedings, positively.