MOHAMMAD ALI,BURDWAN V. ITO, WARD 1(1), DURGAPUR

ITA 1075/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mohammad Ali, the appellant, contesting an order passed by the Addl./JCIT(A) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2016-2017. The appeal was initially time-barred by 354 days, for which the assessee filed an affidavit seeking condonation of the delay, citing miscommunication and lack of guidance from his previous representative. The ITAT found the reasons for the delay sufficient and admitted the appeal. The main contention in the appeal was the non-condonation of a short delay of about 10 days by the CIT(A), attributed to a local festival and communication gaps. The ITAT, considering the substantive justice, remanded the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee an opportunity to present the facts clearly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717079 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1075/Kol/2025 (Assessment Year 2016-2017) Mohammad Ali, Kailaspur, Amdahi Laudoha, Burdwan - 713381 [PAN: BIPPA9199A] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. ITO Ward-1(1), Durgapur, Aayakar Bhawan, City Centre, Durgapur, Burdwan - 734101 ................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate Department represented by : Susanta Saha, Sr. DR, Addl. CIT Date of concluding the hearing : 13.08.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 22.08.2025 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. The ITAT Registry has reported that this appeal is time barred by 354 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit seeking condonation of the said delay as under: “I, Mohammad Ali, son of Alim Sekh, aged about 43 years, by religion Muslim, by occupation business, residing at Kailaspur, Laudoha, Amdahi, Bardhaman- 713381 do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC has passed the appellate order for the A.Υ. 2016- 17 on 21.03.2024. 60 days thereafter elapsed on 20.05.2024, so the due date for presenting the appeal has expired much before. The appeal has been filed on today, thereby 365 days of delay. 2. That Sri Paresh Mondal, A/R has filed the appeal before CIT(A) through online and the appeal hearing notice not issued in registered e-mail. That in the months of March and April, 2025 I have received many message from department to avail VSVS, then I personally appeared before the A.O. immediately and the A.O. intimated me that the CIT(A) has been passed the appellate order. I Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1075/Kol/2025 Mohammad Ali enquired about appeal order and said to A/R. the current status of the appeal order. The said advocate has shown in LT. Portal on 28.04.2025 and immediately said to him for further step. The said A/R. is not very conversant with the Tribunal matters. 3. Then I have approached Sri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate on 1st week of May 2025 for some other taxation matter who has advised me to file the appeal immediately along with a delay Condonation Petition and asked the said lawyer to prepare our appeal immediately and he has prepared the appeal 2nd week of May, 2025 which is filing today. 4. Under the abovementioned facts and circumstances your goodself is requested to condone the said delay and to hear the appeal on merits to meet at the ends of justice, as I am not properly guided by the earlier A/R. What are stated above are true to best of my information and belief.” 1.1 Considering the prayer contained in the said affidavit, the delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. This appeal emanates from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by Ld. Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Lucknow [hereinafter “the Addl/JCIT(A)], vide order dated 21.03.2024. 2.1 Right at the outset, the Ld. AR pointed out that a very short delay of about 10 days was not condoned by the Ld. CIT(A) in spite of the fact that the reasons for the said delay were provided to him. The Ld. AR drew our attention to para 3.2 at page 2 of the impugned order whereby it is clearly mentioned that the delay occurred due to a festival in the area where the assessee is located. The Ld. AR assailed the impugned order. The Ld. AR also pointed out that they could not appear before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) due to a communication gap between the assessee and his tax consultant. The Ld. AR drew our attention to para 4.1 on pages 9 and 3 of the order for the purpose. In conclusion the Ld. AR has averred that the assessee may be allowed one opportunity to present the facts clearly before the Ld. AO so that the impugned transactions, some of which are denied by the assessee, could be conclusively proved. 2.2 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1075/Kol/2025 Mohammad Ali 3. We have carefully considered the submissions of Ld. AR/DR. It is felt that this matter requires careful examination for proving the factual aspects concerning the impugned addition. Accordingly, in the interests of substantive justice, we set aside the impugned order and remand this issue back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh assessment. 4. In result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 22.08.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (Sonjoy Sarma) (Sanjay Awasthi) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 22.08.2025 AK, Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. CIT(DR) //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches Printed from counselvise.com "