M/S. BINAPANI IRON STORE,BERHAMPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BERHAMPUR, BERHAMPUR
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 33 days. The assessee had requested condonation of delay, providing an affidavit with reasons that were deemed plausible and not false. The Revenue did not object to the condonation.
Held
The Tribunal found that the assessee had not substantiated its claim before the lower authorities due to a lack of opportunity. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to present its case and evidence before the Assessing Officer.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present its case and evidence before the Assessing Officer, despite the delay in filing the appeal.
Sections Cited
Section 33(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK (THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING) श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री राजेश कुमार, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.339/CTK/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) M/s Binapani Iron Store, Vs ITO Ward-1, Berhampur At: Gate Bazar, PO/PS:Aska Road Dist : Berhampur-760001 PAN No. : AAYFM 2901 J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 14/08/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order, dated 27.02.2025 passed by the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 33 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for 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, delay of 33 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.
2 ITA No.339/CTK/2025 3. It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. AO to decide the issue involved in this appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate his claim. 4. In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the assessee has not produced any evidence either before the ld. Assessing Officer or before the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that looking to the non- cooperative attitude of the assessee, a reasonable cost deserves to be levied. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee could not substantiate its claim by providing relevant documents neither before the ld. CIT(A) in appellate proceedings nor before the ld. AO in assessment proceedings. However, the ld. AR has made a request before the Bench that if the assessee is given one more opportunity to represent its case before the ld. AO, the assessee could be able to provide all the details before the ld. Assessing Officer to substantiate its claim. This being so, in the interest of justice, we grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the ld. AO by restoring the issues in this appeal to the file of ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.5,000/-
3 ITA No.339/CTK/2025 (Rupees Five Thousand only) shall be payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Bar Association, ITAT Campus, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack- 753014, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the AO positively. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 14/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (राजेश कुमार) (जाजज माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ददनाांक Dated 14/08/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 3. 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. 6. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack
