AMBIKA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE,CUTTACK, CUTTACK
Facts
The assessee, a super distributor of FMCG products, faced assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeals due to delay and non-compliance with notices from both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), which the assessee attributed to suffering from COVID-19 and its after-effects.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay, finding it in the interest of justice to restore all issues to the Assessing Officer for fresh readjudication, provided the assessee pays a cost of Rs. 2000/- per appeal to the ITAT Bar Association within sixty days. Failure to pay the cost will result in the confirmation of the CIT(A)'s order.
Key Issues
Condonation of delay in filing appeals before the CIT(A) due to illness; restoration of assessment proceedings to the AO for readjudication given non-compliance by the assessee.
Sections Cited
147, 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
Per Bench :
These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the Id. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, all dated 14.12.2024, for the assessment years 2017-2018 & 2020-2021. Since the issue involved in all the appeals are similar, therefore, all the appeals are heard and disposed off by this consolidated order. Facts mentioned in ITA No.75/CTK/2025 shall be taken into considering for deciding all the appeals.
It was submitted by the Id. AR that the assessee is an individual, deriving income from business as a super distributor of FMCG products in the name and style of M/s Ambika Agency. The Assessing Officer framed assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act assessing total income of the assessee at Rs.1,74,34,940/-. It was the submission that the assessee was suffering from COVID-19 and its after effect for which he could not consult his counsel in time, therefore, the assessee was non- compliant before both the authorities below, resulting into occurrence of delay in filing the respective appeals before the Id.CIT(A), on the basis of which Id. CIT(A) has dismissed all the appeals of the assessee on account of delay. It was also submitted that the assessee may be given one more opportunity to represent its case before the Assessing Officer, so that the assessee could be able to provide the details before the Assessing Officer to substantiate its case for the years under consideration.
In reply, Ld. CIT-DR supported the orders of the Id. CIT(A) and the Id. AO. It was the submission that restoring the matter to the file of AO would be, in fact, giving the assessee a second round which should not be granted.
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the assessment order clearly shows that the assessee could not furnish the details as asked for by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Further on perusal of the order of the Id. CIT(A), clearly shows that notices were issued to the assessee by the Id. CIT(A), however, no compliance has been made by the assessee during the appellate proceedings. Even the assessee could not explain the respective delay in filing the respective appeals before the Id. CIT(A). However, the Id. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee was suffering from COVID-19 and its after effects due to which the assessee could not consult its counsel to represent its case before the lower authorities, resulting into occurrence of delay in respective appeals. Considering the prayer of the Id. AR, we condone the delay of respective days in all the appeals as mentioned by the Id. CIT(A) in its order at page 2 in tabular form. As no compliance has been made before either of the authorities below, therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in all the appeals are restored to the file of the Id. AO for readjudication the issues afresh after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard, subject to a payment of cost of Rs.2000/-(Rupees Two Thousand only) each in all the appeals by the assessee to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Cuttack, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the Assessing Officer at the first hearing. If the assessee does not pay the abovementioned costs imposed each in all the appeals within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of Id. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.
In the result, all the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 07/04/2025. (राजेश कुमार) (GEORGE MATHAN) (RAJESH KUMAR) लेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यायिक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER दिनांक Dated 07/04/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त (अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, कटक / DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापित प्रति //// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, (
