ASHOK KUMAR JAIN,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , BOLANGIR, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

ITA No.133 /CTK/2026 (Assessment Year: 2019-20)

Ashok Kumar Jain, NH 153, Shyam Income Tax Officer, Mandir Samta Colony, Raipur, Bolangir Vs. Chhatisgarh PAN No.ABZPJ 3055 A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Assessee represented by Shri Nakul Agarwal and Shri P.K.Mishra,ARs Department represented by Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr 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. NFAC/2018-19/10358211 dated 14.7.2025 for the A.Y. 2019-20. 2. Shri Nakul Agarwal and Shri P.K.Mishra, ld. A.Rs. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjib Banerjee, ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. At the outset, it is found that the appeal of the assessee is barred by 131 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed condonation petition 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.

ITA No.133 /Ctk/2026

Accordingly, the delay of 131 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing 4. 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 also the submission that before the AO, part submissions were furnished and the assessment order has been passed u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Act. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the ld Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidences to substantiate its claim. 5. In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the AO and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issue is to be restored to the file of ld JAO, then a cost should be imposed. 6. 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. The assessee also made only partial compliance before the ld AO. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. JAO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. However, looking to the non-cooperation of the assessee during the assessment proceedings and 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,

ITA No.133 /Ctk/2026

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 JAO 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. 7. 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.

Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack, Dated: 25/02/2026 *Ranjan, Sr. PS Copy to: 1. Assessee : Ashok Kumar Jain, 2. Revenue: ITO, Bolangir 3. CIT, NFAC, Delhi 4. DR 5. Guard File By Order

Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cuttack