CHHOTELAL RAM,MALDA V. .ITO,WARD-3(1), MALDA. , MALDA

ITA 1327/KOL/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Chhotelal Ram, the appellant, who contested the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Malda, which assessed his income at Rs. 96,25,466 for the Assessment Year 2017-18, primarily due to cash deposits made during the demonetization period. The initial appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-prosecution, as the assessee failed to appear. The assessee attributed this failure to the illness of his counsel, which caused a delay in filing the appeal to the Tribunal by 38 days. The Tribunal condoned the delay, emphasizing the decision should be based on merits rather than technicalities, and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 36001 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “सी’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA Įी राजेश क ुमार, लेखा सटèय एवं Įी Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1327/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chhotelal Ram (PAN: BOPPR 0446 M) Vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Malda Appellant / ) अपीलाथȸ ( Respondent / Ĥ×यथȸ Date of Hearing / सुनवाई कȧ Ǔतͬथ 09.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement/ आदेश उɮघोषणा कȧ Ǔतͬथ 19.12.2024 For the assessee / Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से Shri Miraj D Shah, A. R For the revenue / राजèव कȧ ओर से Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, Sr. D.R ORDER / आदेश Per Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM: This is the appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.08.2023 for the AY 2017-18. 2 I.T.A. No. 1327/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chhotelal Ram 2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 38 days in filing the appeal. Therefore, the ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an Affidavit which is extracted as under: “1. That the appeal filed by the assessee company before the Commissioner (Appeals), NFAC was disposed of by order dated 28.08.2023 passed by Commissioner (appeals), NFAC. 2. That the time for filing of the appeal before the Tribunal was to expire on 27.10.2023. 3. That there is a delay in filing this appeal because the counsel to whom the appellate order was given for filing had fallen sick and because of his illness the appeal was not filed within the due date. 4. In light of above circumstances, it is requested before your lordship to condone the delay in the present case as the circumstances were beyond the control of the assessee company. 5. That the memo of appeal has been filed on 01.12.2023 in the office of the Tribunal.” Keeping in view, the settled law that the case should be decided on merit not on technical basis as well as going over the condonation petition, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny for the AY 2017-18 on the issue of cash deposit during demonetization period and AO after considering the facts, assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 96,25,466/-. 4. The said order has been challenged before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed on account of non-prosecution. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee has preferred the instant appeal. 5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee instead of entering into merit of the case has submitted that the assessee has been given an opportunity to place his case before the Ld. CIT(A). Assessee has sworn an Affidavit to show his bonafide with regard to non- appearance of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A). 6. Contrary to that the Ld. D.R supports the impugned order. 3 I.T.A. No. 1327/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chhotelal Ram 7. We have gone through the order passed by Learned CIT(A) and finds that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed for non- prosecution. The affidavit filed by the assessee is as below – 4 I.T.A. No. 1327/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Chhotelal Ram 8. Considering the submission, order passed by the CIT(A) and affidavit, we are inclined to give an opportunity to the assessee to place his case before the CIT(A). Accordingly, order passed by CIT(A) is hereby set aside. Record of the assessee is restored in the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. CIT(A) is directed to pass a fresh order after hearing the assessee. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 19th December, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Rajesh Kumar/राजेश क ुमार) (Pradip Kumar Choubey /Ĥदȣप क ुमार चौबे) Accountant Member/लेखा सदèय Judicial Member/ÛयाǓयक सदèय Dated: 19th December, 2024 SM, Sr. PS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Chhotelal Ram, Tulshihata, Harischandrapur, Malda-732140 2. Respondent – ITO, Ward-3(1), Malda 3. Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC, Delhi 4. Ld. Pr. CIT- , Kolkata 5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "