MOHAMMED OBAIDUL HAQUE,PANDUA V. ITO, WARD 32(1), , KOLKATA

ITA 595/KOL/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Mohammed Obaidul Haque against the order of the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The appeal was initially barred by 696 days, but the delay was condoned based on a plausible affidavit provided by the assessee. The main contention during the hearing was the lack of sufficient opportunity given to the assessee to be heard by the CIT(A), which led to the decision to restore the matter for fresh adjudication. The revenue supported the original orders, emphasizing the assessee's non-compliance and non-cooperation during the proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712066 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHANKAR NASKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: C. ROY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “एस.एम.सी” न्यायपीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH KOLKATA श्री जाजज माथन, न्याययक सदस्य क े समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.595/KOL/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Mohammed Obaidul Haque, Village Mahadebpur, Post : Pandua, West Bengal-712149 Vs ITO, Ward-32(1), Kolkata PAN No. : AAMPH 7367 P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri C.Roy, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Shankar Naskar, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 23/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23/07/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 21.02.2023 for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. Shri C.Roy, ld.AR appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shankar Naskar, ld. Sr.DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is barred by 696 days. In this regard, the asessee has filed affidavit stating the sufficient reasons for condoantion of delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Ld.Sr.DR also did not raise any serious objection. Accordingly, delay of 696 days in filing the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 4. During the course of hearing, it was submitted by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing any sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It was the prayer that the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.595/Kol/2025 2 involved in the appeal afresh so that the assessee could be able to produce all the evidence to substantiate its claim. 5. In reply, ld Sr. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer and ld. CIT(A). 6. I have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the assessee could not make any compliance. This being so, in the interest of justice, I grant the assessee one more opportunity to substantiate its claim before the ld. CIT(A) by restoring the issues in the appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) 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, I impose a cost of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twentyfive Thousand only) on the assessee to be payable to the Legal Aid Services, 3rd Floor of the Centenary Building, High Court, Calcutta-700001, within sixty days from the date of this order and receipt of the same would be produced before the ld. CIT(A) at the first hearing. Should the assessee not pay the abovementioned costs within the prescribed period of sixty days from the date of this order, the order of the ld. CIT(A) shall stand confirmed. The assessee shall cooperate in the readjudication proceeding before the ld. CIT(A) positively. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.595/Kol/2025 3 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 23/07/2025. Sd/- (जाजज माथन) (GEORGE MATHAN) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 23/07/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ज फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रयत //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "