Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was delayed by 477 days, for which an application for condonation of delay was filed with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons. The Revenue did not object to the condonation. The assessee's claim could not be substantiated with relevant documents before the lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the non-cooperation of the assessee, the case was restored to the file of the Jurisdictional AO for adjudication afresh with an opportunity of being heard, along with a cost of Rs. 10,000/- imposed on the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal filed by the assessee should be admitted despite the delay, and whether the matter should be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
IT Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA
O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the ld.CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in Appeal No.CIT(A), Cuttack/10462/2019-20 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. Shri P.K.Mishra and Shri Narahari Swain, ld Ars appeared for the assessee and Shri Vijaya Singh, ld Sr DR appeared for the revenue.
T The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 477 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 477 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing.
It was submitted by the ld. AR that the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) have dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the Jurisdictional AO 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 Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issue is to be restored to the file of ld.AO, then a cost should be imposed.
We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee could not substantiate its claim by providing relevant documents. Even the assessee has also failed to produce the evidences as required by the ld. CIT(A) and in absence of the same, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. Jurisdictional AO 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 AO 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 18/02/2026.