DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER CON. EAST COAST RAILWAY,JAJPUR V. ITO, WARD TDS, CUTTACK

ITA 780/CTK/2025

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals filed by the Dy. Chief Engineer Con., East Coast Railway against the orders of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment years 2014-15 to 2017-18. The appeals were initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a significant delay in filing, which was not condoned. The assessee argued that the delay was due to unawareness of the appeal process as a TDS deductor. The Tribunal, considering the principles of substantial justice, decided to condone the delay and restore the appeals for a decision on merits, imposing a nominal cost for the delay.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837401 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2025
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Rule of consistency; TDS

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 780 to 796/CTK/2025 (Assessment Year: 2014-15 to 2017-18) Dy. Chief Engineer Con., East Coast Railway, Opp.- Railway Station Jajpur Road, Jajpur-755019 (Odisha) TAN No. BBND0 0894 F Vs. I.T.O., Ward TDS, Cuttack. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri Amit Kumar Nath, A.R. Department represented by Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, CIT-DR & Shri Vijay Singh Kiroriwal, Sr. DR Date of hearing 18/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 18/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 12/09/2024 and 11/09/2024 for the A.Y. 2014-15 to A.Y. 2017-18 respectively. All the appeals have identical facts and grounds, therefore, all these appeals are heard together and are being decided by this common order. Firstly, we take up the appeal in ITA No. 780/Ctk/2025 for the A.Y.2014-15 as a lead case. 2. Shri Amit Kumar Nath, ld. A.R. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, ld. CIT-DR with Shri Vijay Singh, ld. Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 335 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 780 to 796/Ctk/2025 Dy. Chief Engineer Con. Vs ITO 2 an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, which are not found to be false. Ld. DRs did not object to condone the delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 335 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 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 2753 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 application for condonation of delay. 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. It was submitted by the ld. CIT-Departmental Representative that this is a case of absolute non-representation before the ld. CIT(A). The appeal of the assessee is also delayed by 2753 days in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). the ld. CIT-DR submitted that in the application for condonation of delay before the ld. CIT(A), it was only mentioned that “the appellant was unknown and not aware for appeal of TDS return as a deductor within prescribed time. So delay in appeal, kindly consider and take for necessary process”. It was the submission that the appeal of the assessee is liable to be dismissed on the ground of condonation. It was the submission that at this point, it was told to the ld. CIT-DR that in the interest of justice, the issues are required to be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication. It was then submitted by Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 780 to 796/Ctk/2025 Dy. Chief Engineer Con. Vs ITO 3 the ld. CIT-Departmental Representative 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 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. 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 appeals, 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 he 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 subject to the payment of cost of Rs. 100/- (Rs. Hundred only) to be payable to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack-753014 within 60 days from the date of this order. Liberty is granted to the assessee to recover the said cost from the employee responsible for the failure to comply with the notices and delay in filing of appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. Now we take up appeals in ITA No. 781 to 796/Ctk/2025 for the A.Y. 2014-15 to 2017-18. In these appeals also, there are delay in filing of appeals before the Tribunal and also the delay in filing of appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Since we have condoned the delay in filing appeal in ITA Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 780 to 796/Ctk/2025 Dy. Chief Engineer Con. Vs ITO 4 No. 780/Ctk/2025 before Tribunal, therefore, keeping in view the principle of consistency on similar set of facts, we condone the delay in filing these appeals before this Tribunal. In these appeals also, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assessee without condoning the delay in filing appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Since, we have condoned the delay in filing the appeal in ITA No. 780/CTK/2025 and restored the appeal to the ld. CIT(A), and on similar ground, following the principle of consistency on similar set of facts, the delay in filing these appeals before the ld. CIT(A) are also condoned and all these appeals of the assessee are also restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits subject to cost of Rs.100/-(Rupees hundred only) per appeal payable to ITAT Bar Association, Cuttack within 60 days from the date of this order. Liberty is granted to the assessee to recover the said cost from the employee responsible for the failure to comply with the notices and delay in filing of appeals before the ld. CIT(A). 9. In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 18/02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 18/02/2026 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee - Dy. Chief Engineer Con., East Coast Railway, Opp.- Railway Station Jajpur Road, Jajpur-755019 (Odisha). 2. Revenue- I.T.O., Ward TDS, Cuttack. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. CIT Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 780 to 796/Ctk/2025 Dy. Chief Engineer Con. Vs ITO 5 5. DR 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cuttack Printed from counselvise.com "