SAGAR MINING AND METALS INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,KEONJHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KEONJHAR WARD, KEONJHAR
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order dated 20/12/2024. The appeal was found to be barred by 102 days, for which an application for condonation of delay was filed. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adequate opportunity of being heard.
Held
The tribunal condoned the delay of 102 days. The tribunal observed that the assessee could not substantiate its claim before the lower authorities. However, in the interest of justice, the assessee was granted one more opportunity to represent its case before the AO.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is barred by limitation and whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing 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
आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 20/12/2024 passed in Appeal No.CIT(A),Cuttack/10031/2020-21 for the assessment year 2014-2015. 2. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 102 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 102 days in
2 ITA No.398/CTK/2025
filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 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 the 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 the appeal to the file of
3 ITA No.398/CTK/2025
ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- (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 13/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (राजेश कुमार) (जाजज माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ददनाांक Dated 13/08/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 1. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, 5. Cuttack 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER,
(Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack
