MILAN KUMAR SAHOO,KEONJHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KEONJHAR

PDF

ITA 397/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack13 August 2025AY 2017-18Bench: the Id. CIT(A) in appellate proceedings nor before the Id. AO in assessment proceedings. However, the Id. AR has made a request before the Bench that if the assessee is given one more opportunity to represent its case before the Id. CIT(A), the assessee could be able to provide all the details before the Id. CIT(A) 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 Id. CIT(A) by restoring the 1 pages

AI SummaryPartly Allowed

Facts

The assessee filed an appeal against an order dated 13.11.2024. The appeal was barred by 160 days, and the assessee requested condonation of delay with an affidavit providing reasons. The Revenue did not object to the condonation.

Held

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 160 days and admitted the appeal. Since the assessee could not substantiate its claim with documents before lower authorities, the Tribunal granted one more opportunity to the assessee to present its case before the CIT(A) by restoring the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

Key Issues

Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned and if the assessee should be given another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A).

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

Hearing: 13/08/2025Pronounced: 13/08/2025

O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 13.11.2024 passed in Appeal No.CIT(A), Cuttack/10502/2019-20 for the assessment year 2017-2018.

The appeal of the assessee is barred by 160 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 160 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee. Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue.