ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), BHUBANESWAR
Facts
The assessee's appeal was delayed by 208 days. The assessee had filed an application for condonation of delay with supporting affidavit stating reasons for the delay, which were found plausible. The CIT-DR did not raise any serious objection. The appeal was admitted for hearing.
Held
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 AO. The issues in the appeal were restored to the file of the AO for readjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to substantiate its claim before the Assessing Officer after a delay in filing the appeal.
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 20.09.2024 passed in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10015919 for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 208 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. CIT-DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay of 208 days in
2 ITA No.372/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 CIT-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. 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 ld. AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate
3 ITA No.372/CTK/2025
opportunity of being heard, 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 12/08/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (राजेश कुमार) (जाजज माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ददनाांक Dated 12/08/2025 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 आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack
