DILLIP KUMAR JANA, BALASORE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BALASORE, BALASORE

ITA 215/CTK/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1116 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Dilip Kumar Jana, At Station Bazar, Village Bardi, PO/PS: Jaleswar, Dist: Balasore PAN/GIR No (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated No.CIT(A),Cuttack/10930 2. Shri P.K.Mishra S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.215/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dilip Kumar Jana, At-95, Station Bazar, Village-Mill Bardi, PO/PS: Jaleswar, Dist: Balasore Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Balasore PAN/GIR No.AELPJ 0274 L (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri P.K.Mishra, Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Date of Hearing : 8/07 Date of Pronouncement : 8/0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 18.07.2023 CIT(A),Cuttack/10930/2019-20 for the assessment year P.K.Mishra, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr. DR appeared for the revenue. Page1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Respondent) P.K.Mishra, Adv : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR 7/2024 /07/2024 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld .2023 in Appeal for the assessment year 2014-15. the assessee and Shri ITA No.215/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page2 | 4 3. The appeal is delayed by 232 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition dated 3.5.2024 supported by affidavit, stating that even though the order of the ld CIT(A) was received on 19.7.2023 but by during the said time, the assessee was seriously suffered from neurological disease (Micro Vascular complications) of brain, vertigo and legs and had undergone medical treatment for a longer time and was advised complete bed rest. The assessee had no knowledge about passing of this order, as such, he could not file the appeal within the due date. It was in this backdrop that there was delay of 232 days in filing of the present appeal. This contention of the assessee has not been found to be false. Consequently, we condone the delay of 232 days and admit the appeal for hearing. 4. It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has passed order exparte without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. He submitted that the Assessing officer has passed assessment order u/s.144 of the Act. He prayed to remit the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration of the issues in this appeal. 5. In reply, ld Sr DR supported the order of the AO and ld CIT(A). 6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that the ld CIT(A) has issued several notices, as is evident from the order of the ld CIT(A) at page 3. As the documentary ITA No.215/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page3 | 4 evidences in support of the claim were not furnished and due to non- compliance to the notices, the ld CIT(A) has passed the exparte order. Now, ld AR has undertaken before us that if one more opportunity is granted, the assessee would be in a position to file the documentary evidences in support of the claim before the Assessing officer. We also find that the assessment in this case has been passed u/s.144 due to non- representation of the assessee before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the ld CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to readjudicate the issue after affording reasonable opportunities of hearing to the assessee, subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five Thousand only) to be deposited within 60 days from the date of this order under the head “others” in ITNS challan 280 in the Account No.500. In the event the cost is not paid, the order passed by the ld CIT(A) and that of the AO would stand confirmed. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 08/07/2024. Sd/- sd/- (Manish Agarwal) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 08/07/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) ITA No.215/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Page4 | 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant Dilip Kumar Jana, At-95, Station Bazar, Village-Mill Bardi, PO/PS: Jaleswar, Dist: Balasore 2. The Respondent: Income Tax Officer, Ward- 2, Balasore 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy//