VIJAY FOMRA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 40(1),, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2729/KOL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 February 2026AY 2016-2017Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member), Shri Rakesh Mishra (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the ground of delay without adjudicating the issues on merits. The Tribunal found that the assessee should be granted another opportunity to contest the matter on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income, which was selected for limited scrutiny. The Assessing Officer made additions to the income. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) with a delay of 74 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay without considering the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH KOLKATA

Before: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Before Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member and Shri Rakesh Mishra, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vijay Fomra…………………..………………....…………………....Appellant 57, Fomra House Burtolla Street, Burrabazar, Kol-7.. [PAN: AADPF7609P] vs. ITO, Ward-40(1), Kolkata..…….……....…..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances by: Shri Sonal Agarwal, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Mrinmoy Basak, Sr. DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : February 02, 2026 Date of pronouncing the order : February 02, 2026 आदेश / ORDER

Per Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Addl/JCIT(A)-2, Pune (hereinafter referred to as “ld. CIT(A)”) dated 15.09.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).

2.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of ₹4,98,860. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS. The Assessing Officer completed assessment u/s 143(3) by making certain additions.

3.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, there was a delay of 74 days in filing the appeal. The learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the Vijay Fomra ground of delay, without adjudicating the issues on merits. Being dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal merely on technical grounds without granting an effective opportunity of hearing and without examining the merits of the case. It was contended that the assessee deserves one more opportunity in the interest of justice.

5.

On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below.

6.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal only on the ground of delay, without going into the merits of the additions made by the Assessing Officer. Considering the principles of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to contest the matter on merits. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fairness, we remand the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate and comply with the notices issued by the authorities.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →