Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-submission of details. The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT, which was barred by 742 days.
Held
The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal, noting that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without considering the merits due to non-submission of documents. The ITAT restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication but imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000 on the assessee for non-cooperation.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-submission of documents should be restored, and the condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA
Assessee represented by Shri K.K.Bal, A.R. Department represented by Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, ld CIT DR Date of hearing 25/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 25/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld.CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. CIT(A),Cuttack/10189/2015-16 dated 23/11/2023 for the A.Y. 2012-13 2. Shri K.K.Bal, ld. A.R. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, ld CIT DR represented on behalf of the revenue.
At the outset, it is found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 742 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed condonation petition supported by affidavit stating the sufficient reasons for condonation of delay, which are not found to be false. Ld.Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 742 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte due to non-submission of details before him. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the ld CIT(A) to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidences to substantiate its claim.
In reply, ld CIT DR vehemently supported the order of ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issue is to be restored to the file of ld CIT(A), then a cost should be imposed.
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of ld CIT(A) clearly shows that various opportunities were provided to the assessee to substantiate the grounds of appeal by furnishing documents/ evidences and in absence of the same, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without considering the issue on merits. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. However, looking to the non-cooperation of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings even after issuance of notices to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A), we impose a cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten Thousand only) on the assessee, as admitted by the ld. A.R. of the assessee, to be payable to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack-753014, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the ld CIT(A) at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the above-mentioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 25/02/2026.