STATE BANK OF INDIA,BALONI BRANCH,BALONI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 765/CTK/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 February 2026AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT, noting that the delay was not inordinate and that substantial justice should be preferred over technicality. The Tribunal also restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT which was delayed by 266 days. The assessee had also filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed ex-parte for a delay of 20 days without considering the merits of the case. The assessee requested that the matter be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be admitted for hearing despite a delay, and whether the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order dismissing the appeal without considering merits should be set aside.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Agarwalla, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr.DR
Hearing: 23/02/2026Pronounced: 23/02/2026

Assessee represented by Shri S.K. Agarwalla, A.R. Department represented by Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr.DR Date of hearing 23/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 23/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Bhubaneshwar-2 in Appeal No. CIT(A), Cuttack/10162/2013-14 dated 17/01/2025 for the A.Y. 2011-12.

2.

Shri S.K. Agarwalla, ld. A.R. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sanjib Banerjee, Sr.DR represented on behalf of the revenue.

3.

The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 266 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, which are not found to be false. Ld. Sr. DR did not object to condone the delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 266 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.

SBI Vs JCIT(TDS) 4. At the time of hearing before us, it was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without condoning the delay of 20 days in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without considering the merit of the case. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) after condoning the delay to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh on merit.

5.

In reply, ld Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). However, it was submitted by the ld. Sr.DR that if the issues are being restored to the file of the ld. CIT-(A), then exemplary cost must be levied.

6.

We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of condonation of delay and without considering the merit of the case. The delay in not an inordinate in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). When substantial justice is pitted against technicality such as limitation, it is always better to follow the principles of adjudicating in respect of the substantial justice. By not condoning the delay in filing of the appeal, considerable loss could be caused to the assessee but by condoning the delay and adjudicating on merits, the assessee would also know what is the mistakes that it has committed. This being so, we are of the view that the delay in filing of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be condoned and we do so. It is noticed from the order of the ld. CIT(A) that the SBI Vs JCIT(TDS) assessee could not substantiate its claim by providing relevant documents. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating on merits after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 23/02/2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →