Pradeep Kumar Routray, Bhubaneswar V. ACIT, Central Circcle, Cuttack

ITSSA 2/CTK/2020

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Pradeep Kumar Routray against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, for the assessment year 2016-17. The appeal was initially time-barred by 317 days, for which the assessee filed a condonation petition explaining the delay was due to the negligence of his accountant. The Tribunal found the reason for the delay reasonable and admitted the appeal. Additionally, the assessee presented new evidence during the proceedings, which was not available at the time of the initial assessment. This evidence related to a transaction with the seller of a flat, which was deemed significant enough to warrant a re-examination of the case by the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 300321 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax (Search & Seizure) Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 23-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pradeep Kumar Routray, Flat No.202, Sai Prassad Enclave, Nuasahi, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar. PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld CIT(A)-2, Bhubaneswar for the assessment year 2. Sri Natabar Panda, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld Pr. CIT (OSD) appeared for the revenue. 3. The appeal is time barred by 317 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition dated 21.2.2020 supported by an affidavit duly notorised, contending the fact in filing the appeal delay of 317 days that the accountant of the assessee after receiving the first appeal order did not IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER IT(ss)A No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Pradeep Kumar Routray, Flat No.202, Sai Prassad Enclave, Nuasahi, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Cuttack PAN/GIR No.AGPPR 9563 C (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri Natabar Panda, AR Revenue by : Shri M.K.Gautam, Pr. CIT (OSD) Date of Hearing : 24 /0 Date of Pronouncement : 24 /0 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld 2, Bhubaneswar dated 31.1.2019 in Appeal No. for the assessment year 2016-17. Sri Natabar Panda, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld Pr. CIT (OSD) appeared for the revenue. The appeal is time barred by 317 days. The assessee has filed onation petition dated 21.2.2020 supported by an affidavit duly notorised, contending the fact in filing the appeal delay of 317 days that the accountant of the assessee after receiving the first appeal order did not Page1 | 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 20 ACIT, Central Circle, Respondent) Natabar Panda, AR Pr. CIT (OSD) 03/2023 /03/2023 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld in Appeal No. 0463/2017-18 Sri Natabar Panda, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri M.K.Gautam, ld Pr. CIT (OSD) appeared for the revenue. The appeal is time barred by 317 days. The assessee has filed onation petition dated 21.2.2020 supported by an affidavit duly notorised, contending the fact in filing the appeal delay of 317 days that the accountant of the assessee after receiving the first appeal order did not IT(ss)A No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page2 | 3 bring the fact to the notice of the assessee and when the notices were received from the AO for payment of the outstanding dues, then it was enquired and found that the second appeal has not been filed against the order of the ld CIT(A). It was contended that due to this fact, the appeal could not be filed within the stipulated period. It was submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal was neither deliberate nor intentional. Ld AR reiterating the condonation petition prayed that the delay of 317 days may be condoned. Ld Pr. CIT (OSD) objected to the condonation petition. After hearing the parties, we are convinced that the delay in filing of the appeal was due to reasonable cause. Therefore, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. It was submitted by ld AR that an affidavit has been filed by the assessee, wherein, he has mentioned that he has been served with a letter from the seller of the Flat Mrs Tanuja Shah requesting the assessee to return the flat purchased by him and she was ready to refund the amount of Rs.30 lakhs as she has not received the balance consideration of Rs.25 lakhs. It was the submission that this affidavit was not before the lower authorities. It was the prayer that fresh evidence may kindly be considered for adjudicating the appeal of the assessee. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the fresh evidence is admittedly a letter from the seller of the flat and relates to the issues in the appeal and as admittedly this letter has been served on IT(ss)A No.02/CTK/2020 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Page3 | 3 the assessee after adjudication of the appeal by the ld CIT(A) and during the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal, we are of the view that in the interest of justice, this evidence must also be placed before the lower authorities. This being so, in the interest of justice, the issues in the appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing officer for re-adjudication after considering the additional evidence produced before the Tribunal. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 24/03/2023. Sd/- sd/- (Arun Khodpia) (George Mathan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 24/03/2023 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Pradeep Kumar Routray, Flat No.202, Sai Prassad Enclave, Nuasahi, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar 2. The Respondent: ACIT, Central Circle, Cuttack 3. The CIT(A)—2, Bhubaneswar 4. Pr.CIT-,-2, Bhubaneswar 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack 6. Guard file. //True Copy//