GOVINDA KUMAR SARKAR,NAIHATI V. I.T.O., WARD - 3(2), PURULIA

ITA 2047/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Govinda Kumar Sarkar against the order of the CIT(A), which had dismissed his appeal due to an excessive delay in filing. The assessee, a retired employee, claimed that the delay was due to his lack of online access and improper advice from his consultant. The Tribunal considered these submissions but found them insufficient to justify the delay, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829287 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Kolkata
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2025
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT ADHIKARI
• Assessee Lawyers: S.K. KAMALAUDDIN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.2047/KOL/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-2016) Govinda Kumar Sarkar, 37, SC Pal Road, Naihati Bannerjee Para, 24 Parganas North, West Bengal-743165 Vs ITO Ward-3(2), Purulia PAN No. :AIVPS 2875 C (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : S.K.Kamalauddin, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Abhijit Adhikari, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 12/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 12/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by the ld.Addl/JCIT(A)-7, Delhi for the assessment year 2015-2016. 2. It was submitted by the ld.AR that the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal as the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) of 3126 days. It was submitted by the ld.AR that the assessee is a retired employee and he was not having online access and he has not been advised properly by his consultant. It was the prayer that the delay before the ld.CIT(A) may kindly be condoned and the appeal of the assessee may kindly be disposed off on merits. 3. In reply, ld.Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the ld. AO and ld. CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2047/KOL/2025 2 4. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the para 2.4 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the ld. CIT(A) has considered the fact that the assessee has not given any sufficient reasons for delay of 3126 das delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee admittedly has not been able to given any reasonable cause for the delay. Consequently, I do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and I uphold the same and dismiss the appeal of the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 12/01/2026. Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 12/01/2026 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "