Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was delayed by 18 days due to the health issues of a key functionary. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without providing an adequate opportunity for a hearing.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay and, finding merit in the assessee's contention about the lack of natural justice, set aside the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred by dismissing the appeal without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Sections Cited
IT Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: S/SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY(KZ) & RAJESHH KUAMR
Assessment Year : 2014-15 Swayamshree Micro Credit Vs. DCIT (Exemption), Bhubaneswar Services 751007 Plot No 549/2126, Patia. Bhubaneswar, 751024 PAN/GIR No. AAICS 1120 N (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Bibekananda Mohanty , Advoate Revenue by : Shri Prateek Ku MIshra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01 /07/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NAFC), New Delhi NFAC), Delhi dated 17/08/2023 in Appeal No. CIT(A), bhhubaneswar-3/10370/2016-17 passed for Assessment Year 2014-15.
The appeal is delayed by 18 days before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed condonation petition stating that due to health problem of the Chief
P a g e 1 | 3 Functionary Shri Sahadev Das, aged about 75 years, the appeal could not be filed within the due date, which has resulted delay of 18 days. It is prayed that the delay be condoned. Ld Sr DR did not oppose the condonation of delay. On consideration of the submission of ld AR of the assessee, we condone the delay of 18 days and admit the appeal for hearing.
At the time of hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He prayed before the Bench that the impugned order be set aside and remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) for deciding it afresh.
On the other hand, ld Sr DR supported the orders of the lower authorities.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that as there was no response to the notices to substantiate the claim with documentary evidences and submissions, ld CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the AO. Before us, ld AR prayed for one more opportunity to represent the case before the ld CIT(A). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are inclined to set aside the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) in order to meet the principle of natural justice, and remit the matter back to the file of the ld CIT(A) with a direction to provide
P a g e 2 | 3 one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same breath, we also hereby caution the assessee to promptly co-operate with the proceedings before the ld CIT(A), failing which the ld CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law and merits based on the materials available on the record. Thus, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/07/2025.