SURYAKANTA BEHERA, PARADIP V. ITO WARD PARADEEP, PARADEEP

ITA 53/CTK/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7867 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-04-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 11-02-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Set aside
• Section: 69A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE Suryakanta Behera, Irrigation Colony, Town Hall Road, Jagatsinghpur. PAN/GIR No (Appellant This is an appeal filed by the assessee aga CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi No.CIT(A),Cuttack/10441/2019 2. None appeared for the assessee. the absence of ld AR of the assessee, I proceed to do so. ld Sr DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal is time barred by 58 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition supported by affidavit, wherein, it is stated that the appeal could not be filed within the stipulation time period due to the IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL ITA No.53/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Suryakanta Behera, Panisalia Irrigation Colony, Town Hall Road, Jagatsinghpur. Vs. ITO, Ward Paradeep, Paradeep. PAN/GIR No.ARHPB 7077 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR Date of Hearing : 15/0 Date of Pronouncement : 15/0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 17.10.2023 Cuttack/10441/2019-20 for the assessment year appeared for the assessee. Since the appeal can be decided in the absence of ld AR of the assessee, I proceed to do so. represented on behalf of the revenue. The appeal is time barred by 58 days. The assessee has filed ation petition supported by affidavit, wherein, it is stated that the appeal could not be filed within the stipulation time period due to the Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, , CUTTACK JUDICIAL MEMBER ITO, Ward Paradeep, Paradeep. Respondent) : Shri S.C.Mohanty, ld Sr DR 04/2024 /04/2024 inst the order of the ld 17.10.2023 in Appeal for the assessment year 2017-18. Since the appeal can be decided in the absence of ld AR of the assessee, I proceed to do so. Shri S.C.Mohanty, The appeal is time barred by 58 days. The assessee has filed ation petition supported by affidavit, wherein, it is stated that the appeal could not be filed within the stipulation time period due to the ITA No.53/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Page2 | 3 larches and lapses of the authorized representative appointed for dealing and advising on income tax matters. After going through the condonation petition, I find that the assessee had reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Ld D.R. did not have any objection for condoning the delay. I, therefore, condone the delay of 58 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for hearing. 4. I have considered the submission of ld Sr DR. and gone through orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has not pursued his case before the First Appellate Authority with utmost care and diligent which is evident from the fact that although, the Ld.CIT(A) has given sufficient opportunities, but the assessee could not file complete details to justify source for cash deposits. At the same time, although, the Ld.CIT(A) has disposed off appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution, but failed to decide the issue on merits with reasoning which is evident from the order of the Ld.CIT(A), where the Ld.CIT(A) upheld the additions made by the AO. In my considered view, even in a case where the appeal is disposed off for non-prosecution or ex parte for non-appearance, the appeal should be disposed off on merits on the basis of materials available on record. In the grounds of appeal, it is stated that the assessee being a salaried person, he is not required to maintain books of account and thereby the provisions of section 69A cannot be attracted. In view of above, I am of the considered view that the issues ITA No.53/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Page3 | 3 need to go back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on merits , and thus, I set aside order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the issues to the file of AO with a direction to re-adjudicate the issues in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall appear before the AO and file necessary evidences without seeking any adjournment. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 15/04/2024. Sd/- (George Mathan) JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 15/04/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Suryakanta Behera, Panisalia Irrigation Colony, Town Hall Road, Jagatsinghpur 2. The Respondent: ITO, Ward Paradeep, Paradeep 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//