K.B. TECHNIC PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA V. DC/ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PATNA

ITA 130/PAT/2025

AI Insights

KB Technic Private Limited appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 27.09.2023 for the assessment year 2011-12. The appeal was initially delayed by 474 days, for which a condonation petition was filed, citing lack of proper notification about the order's availability on the e-portal. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay genuine and condoned it. The main contention of the assessee was that the orders were passed without sufficient opportunity for the assessee to present its case, thus lacking adherence to the principles of natural justice. Both the Departmental Representative and the Tribunal agreed that the orders were not in compliance with Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which mandates a detailed reasoning and analysis of the facts.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712393 (ITAT-PATNA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHWANI KR. SINGAL
• Assessee Lawyers: A.K. RASTOGI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice; Assessment record
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘PATNA’ BENCH, PATNA BEFORE SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM AND SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JM ITA No.130/PAT/2025 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) KB Technic Private Limited 3-A, Singeshwar Place, East Boring Canal Road, Patna-800001, Bihar Vs. DC/ACIT, Circle-2 Patna-800001 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN No. AAACK9200F Assessee by : Shri A.K. Rastogi, AR Revenue by : Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR Date of hearing: 10.07.2025 Date of pronouncement: 29.07.2025 O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 27.09.2023 for the AY 2011-12. 02. It appears from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 474 days for which the assessee has filed condonation petition., which are as follows- “To. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna. Reference: KB Technic Private Ltd., 3-A. Singeshwar Palace, East Boring Canal Road, Patna 800 001. Bihar (PAN: AAACK9200F) for Α.Υ.2011-12. Subject: Petition for condonation of delay in filing appeal. Reference: Order of CIT(A), NFAC dated 27/09/2023. Printed from counselvise.com Page | 2 ITA No. 130/PAT/2025 K.B. Technic Private Limited; A.Y. 2011-12 Sir, The Ld. CIT(A) has passed order in Appeal No.CIT(A), Patna-1/10482/2018-19 on 27/09/2023. It is stated that on 19/02/2025, an order u/s 271(1)(c) for A.Y.2011-12, was uploaded on the e-portal of the assessee under the tab For your action' that the petitioner came to know about the impugned order of CIT(A) dated 27/09/2023. Thereafter, on browsing of e-portal the appellant has found the impugned order dismissing the appeal on 27/09/2023 under the tab 'For Your Information' whereas normally the orders are uploaded under the tab 'For your action'. There was no communication of uploading of this order either on the registered email or registered mobile no. Thus, the appellant came to know about the adverse order of Ld. CIT(A) only on 19/02/2025. Accordingly, the appellant is filing this appeal which can be said to be a belated appeal, if limitation is counted from the date of its order. However, it is stated that the impugned order came to the knowledge of the appellant on 19/02/2025 and therefore, according to the appellant, the present appeal is not a belated appeal. However, without entering into controversy, it is respectfully submitted that delay, if any, may kindly be condoned and the appeal may kindly be heard on merits.” 03. On perusal of the condonation petition, the reasons for delay in filing the appeal seem to be genuine and bonafide. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection for condoning the delay. Keeping in view, the condonation petition as well as judicial pronouncements that the case should be decided on merit and justice should not be denied on technicalities, the delay is hereby condoned. 04. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the orders of ld. CIT (A) as well as ld. AO are ex-parte order and is liable to set aside. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted before the Bench that the orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s. 250 of the Act was without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee and as such the order is bereft of natural justice and is liable to be set aside. 05. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative did not object to such prayer made by the assessee before the Bench. 06. We after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, we find that instant impugned order Printed from counselvise.com Page | 3 ITA No. 130/PAT/2025 K.B. Technic Private Limited; A.Y. 2011-12 passed by NFAC was dismissed without looking into the merits of the case by simply dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine by not considering the reply uploaded by the assessee on the portal.In our opinion, the order passed by the ld. CIT (A) is in violation of Provision of Section 250(6) of the Act. Sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, mandates the ld. CIT(A) to state the point in dispute, and thereafterrecord reasons in support of his conclusion. A perusal of the order of theld. CIT(A) would indicate that it is not in consonance with mandategiven in the Act. The ld. CIT(A) has not made any analysis of factsavailable on record, including the assessment records and has passed anex-parte order. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable, it deserves to be set aside. We therefore, deem it necessary and in the larger interest of justice and fair play, deem it appropriate to restore the issue to the file of the ld. AO for necessary adjudication for which reasonable opportunity to be provided to the assessee to furnish the reply and file relevant details and evidences if needed. It is further clarified that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 07. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY) (RAJESH KUMAR) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Kolkata, Dated: 29.07.2025 Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS Printed from counselvise.com Page | 4 ITA No. 130/PAT/2025 K.B. Technic Private Limited; A.Y. 2011-12 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary/ Asst. Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Printed from counselvise.com "