AMAR MOHAN SAHOO,ANGUL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL, ANGUL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 337/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay of 63 days and admitted the appeal for hearing. 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 present its case before the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was delayed by 63 days. The assessee sought condonation of delay, stating sufficient reasons. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without providing a sufficient opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be admitted despite the delay, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to substantiate its claim.

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: 15/07/2025Pronounced: 15/07/2025

आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 09.09.2024 assessment year 2017-2018. 2. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 63 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with affidavit stating sufficient reasons for delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Accordingly, delay of 63 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing.

1.

3. It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing 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 its claim.

4.

In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and 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 opportunity of being heard. Liberty is granted to the assessee to produce all such evidences to substantiate his claim before the Assessing Officer.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →