KADAMBALA HARISCHANDRA CHOUDHURY ,BERHAMPUR , GANJAM V. ITO, WARD 1 , BERHAMPUR, BEHERAMPUR,ORISSA

ITA 68/CTK/2026

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Kadambala Harischandra Choudhury against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, which was dated 12/02/2025 for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal was initially delayed by 267 days, for which a condonation was sought and granted without objection from the Senior Departmental Representative (DR). The primary contention in the appeal was the ex-parte dismissal of the assessee's case by both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), which the assessee sought to overturn by requesting a restoration of the matter to the Jurisdictional AO for a fresh decision, allowing the presentation of evidence. The Senior DR supported the original decisions and suggested imposing costs if the case were to be restored. The ITAT decided to restore the case to the AO but imposed a cost on the assessee due to previous non-cooperation in the appellate proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837508 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 22-01-2026
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 68/CTK/2026 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Kadambala Harischandra Choudhury, Hatibandha, Street, Berhampur, Ganjam, Brahmapur-760001 (Odisha) PAN No. AGXPK 7229 E Vs. I.T.O., Ward-1, Berhampur. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri J.M. Pattanaik, Adv. Department represented by Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing 17/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 17/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10246945 dated 12/02/2025 for the A.Y. 2018-19. 2. Shri J.M. Pattanaik, ld. A.R. is appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh, ld. Sr. DR is represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 267 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, which are not found to be false. Ld. Sr. DR did not object to condone the delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 267 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 68/Ctk/2026 Kadambala Harischandra Choudhury Vs ITO 2 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) have dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of the Jurisdictional AO to decide the issue involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidences to substantiate its claim. 5. In reply, ld Sr.DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issue is to be restored to the file of ld.AO, then a cost should be imposed. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed from the orders of the authorities below that the assessee could not substantiate its claim by providing relevant documents. Even the assessee was also failed to produce the evidences as required by the ld. CIT(A) and in absence of the same, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, we restore the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. Jurisdictional AO for adjudicating afresh after providing the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. However, looking to the non-cooperation of the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings even after issuance of notices to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A), we impose a cost of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand only) on the assessee, as admitted by the ld. A.R. of the assessee, to be payable to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bar Association, Sector-1, CDA, Cuttack-753014, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the AO at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the above- Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 68/Ctk/2026 Kadambala Harischandra Choudhury Vs ITO 3 mentioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 17/02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 17/02/2026 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee - Kadambala Harischandra Choudhury, Hatibandha, Street, Berhampur, 2. Revenue- I.T.O., Ward-1,Berhampur. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. CIT 5. DR 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cuttack Printed from counselvise.com "