PRADYUMNA KUMAR NANDA,ANGUL V. ITO, DELHI

ITA 403/CTK/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the assessee, Pradyumna Kumar Nanda, against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, which had dismissed the assessee's appeal as being delayed by 106 days. The original assessment order was passed on September 17, 2021, and the appeal was required to be filed by October 25, 2021. However, the appeal was filed on February 9, 2022. The assessee argued that the delay was justified due to the extension of limitation periods granted by the Supreme Court in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Tribunal agreed with the assessee, noting that the appeal was filed within the extended period and thus was not delayed. The Tribunal also observed that not all evidence was presented before the Assessing Officer, leading to the decision to restore the matter for re-adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473623 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 28-09-2024
• Laws Referred To: Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 regarding Cognizance for Extension of Limitation
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S.C.MOHANTY
• Assessee Lawyers: P.R.MOHANTY
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEFORE MANISH AGARWAL Pradyumna Kumar Nanda, Susuda, Ankula, Angul PAN/GIR No. (Appellant Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 2.9.2024 for the assessment year 2. Shri P.R.Mohanty, (3rd year), intern assessee and Shri year) intern University Law College, Bhubaneswar revenue. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.403/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Pradyumna Kumar Nanda, Susuda, Ankula, Angul Vs. ITO, Delhi No.AEVPN 3839 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty, Adv Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR Date of Hearing : 21/10/202 Date of Pronouncement : 21/10/2024 O R D E R This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 2.9.2024 in Appeal No.NFAC/2015 for the assessment year 2016-17. P.R.Mohanty, ld AR, assisted by Shri Om Shiv year), intern University Law College, Bhubaneswar appeared for assessee and Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. DR assisted by Ms Karisma Mohanty (4 year) intern University Law College, Bhubaneswar appeared for the P a g e 1 | 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MEMBER Respondent) P.R.Mohanty, Adv DR 24 4 This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld NFAC/2015-16/10056287 v Shankar Sahoo appeared for the assisted by Ms Karisma Mohanty (4th appeared for the ITA No403/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 2 | 4 3. It was submitted by ld AR that the ld CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 106 days. It was the submission that the appeal of the assesse has been filed on 9.2.2022. It was the submission that admittedly, the assessment order was passed on 17.9.2021 and appeal was to be filed on or before 25.10.2021 being 30 days from the date of service of the assessment order and the appeal was filed only on 9.2.2022. It was the submission that the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 regarding Cognizance for Extension of Limitation (on account of COVID-19) vide order dated 27th April, 2021 has restored the Limited Extention order dated 6th May, 2020 and held “in continuation of the order dated 8th March 2021, the period(s) of limitation, as prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, whether condonable or not, shall stand extended till 28.2.2022. It was the submission that the appeal is filed within the said period, same cannot be considered as delayed. It was the submission that order of the ld CIT(A) is liable to be reversed and the issues be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer insofar as admittedly, there has been failure on the part of the assessee to produce all the evidences before the Assessing officer. 4. In reply, ld Sr DR vehemently supported the order of the ld CIT(A). It was the submission that if the issues are being set aside, it should be sent to the file of the ld CIT(A), NFAC. To this, ld AR submitted that ITA No403/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 3 | 4 effectively, as the details have not been produced before the AO, even ld CIT(A) would have sent back the matter to the file of the AO and in the interest of justice, it can be sent back by the Tribunal. 5. We have considered the rival submissions. The facts in the present case clearly shows that the assessee has filed appeal before the ld CIT(A) within the limitation as provided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Suo Moto Writ Petition (C) No. 3/2020 (supra). This being so, it cannot be held that there is delay in filing of the appeal before the ld CIT(A) by the assessee. It is also noticed that the assessee has not produced all the evidences before the Assessing Authority for proper adjudication. This being so, it is held that there is no delay in filing of the appeal before the ld CIT(A). The order of the ld CIT(A) is set aside and the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 21/10/2024. SD/- SD/- (George Mathan) (Manish Agarwal) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 21/10/2024 B.K.Parida, SPS (OS) ITA No403/CTK/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 P a g e 4 | 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : By order Sr.Pvt.Secretary ITAT, Cuttack 1. The Appellant : Pradyumna Kumar Nanda, Susuda, Ankula, Angul 2. The Respondent: ITO, Delhi 3. The CIT(A)- NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr.CIT, Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// "