NARAMSETTI PRASAD RAO,BANDHUGAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAYAGADA, RAYAGADA WARD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 389/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 August 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee appeared through virtual mode but was not in the prescribed uniform. Based on this procedural lapse, the Tribunal decided to dismiss the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order dated 30/06/2024. The appeal was heard through virtual mode. The AR for the assessee appeared but was not in uniform as prescribed in the SOP for virtual appearances.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to non-compliance with the SOP regarding the attire of the AR during a virtual hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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: 12/08/2025Pronounced: 12/08/2025

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 30/06/2024 passed in Appeal No.NFAC/2017-18/10221052 for the assessment year 2018-2019. 2. Shri N.Trinath Rao, ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee through virtual mode, was not in unform as prescribed in the SOP for appearing in the virtual mode. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

3.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 12/08/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →