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

PDF · subscribers
ITA 240/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 September 2025AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 784 days and admitted the appeal for hearing. The issues were restored to the file of the AO for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) for the assessment year 2019-20. The appeal was filed with a delay of 784 days. The assessee provided an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for the delay.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable and if the issues should be restored to the AO for fresh adjudication with a cost.

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

Hearing: 22/092025Pronounced: 22/09/2025

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi dated 14/12/2022 passed in Appeal No.NFAC/2018-19//10092030 for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. At the outset, it is found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 784 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 784 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.

3.

It was the submission of the ld. AR that the assessee could not provide the details before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. It was the prayer of the ld. AR that the issue may be restored to the file of ld.AO, so that the assessee would be able to substantiate its claim before the AO.

4.

In reply, ld Sr DR submitted that proper opportunities were allowed and the assessee could not produce the documents as required by both the authorities below. It was submitted that if the matter is restored to the file of AO, as requested by the ld. AR, then a reasonable cost may be imposed on the assessee.

5.

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, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twentyfive Thousand only) payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack-753014, Odisha, within sixty days from the date of this

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →