BANER SERVICE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,KALAHANDI vs. ITO, BHAWANIPATNA WARD, BHAWANIPATNA
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order dated 30.05.2024. The appeal was barred by 352 days, and an application for condonation of delay was filed. The assessee's representative argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without providing sufficient opportunity to be heard.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the appeal. The Tribunal noted 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 CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the appeal is barred by limitation and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A).
Sections Cited
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 30.05.2024 passed in Appeal No.CIT(A), Sambalpur/10128/2018-19 for the assessment year 2016-2017. 2. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 352 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 352 days in
2 ITA No.403/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 of the assessee 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. CIT(A) to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh on merits 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). 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. CIT(A), the assessee could be able to provide all the details before the ld. 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 ld. CIT(A) by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh on merits after providing the assessee
3 ITA No.403/CTK/2025
adequate opportunity of being heard. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. CIT(A) 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. sआदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy//
(Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack
