PRAVAKAR PATRA,BHADRAK V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, BHADRAK, BHADRAK

ITA 82/CTK/2026

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals filed by the assessee, Pravakar Patra, against the orders of the CIT(A) for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2015-16. The appeals were initially dismissed by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) due to the absence of sufficient evidence provided by the assessee. The ITAT found that the assessee was not given a sufficient opportunity to present his case and decided to restore the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh decision, allowing the assessee to present all necessary evidence. The Tribunal also condoned the delay in filing the appeals, which was supported by an affidavit from the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 838090 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 25-01-2026
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Rule of consistency

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 78 to 82/CTK/2026 (Assessment Year: 2013-14 to 2015-16) Pravakar Patra, Badarampur, Bahudarada, Bhadrak-756112 (Odisha) TAN No. BDNPP 6220 Q Vs. I.T.O., Ward, Bhadrak. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri P.K. Mishra, A.R. Department represented by Shri Vijay Singh Kiroriwal, Sr. DR Date of hearing 18/02/2026 Date of pronouncement 18/02/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 14/11/2024, 13/11/2024 and 08/09/2025 for the A.Y. 2013-14, 2014-15 and A.Y. 2015-16 respectively. All the appeals have identical facts and grounds, therefore, all these appeals are heard together and are being decided by this common order. Firstly, we take up the appeal in ITA No. 78/Ctk/2026 for the A.Y. 2013-14 as a lead case. 2. Shri P.K. Mishra, ld. A.R. appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Vijay Singh Kiroriwal, ld. Sr. DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 361 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 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 78 to 82/Ctk/2026 Pravakar Patra Vs ITO 2 appeal before the Tribunal, which are not found to be false. Ld. DRs did not object to condone the delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 361 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A) have dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It was a submission that the assessee has not produced sufficient evidence before the Assessing Officer and before the ld. CIT(A). 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. The Assessing Officer has passed assessment order ex parte. It was submitted by the ld. AR that he will provide all the details and evidences before the Assessing Officer, this being so, in the interest Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 78 to 82/Ctk/2026 Pravakar Patra Vs ITO 3 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 to substantiate its case. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the Assessing Officer by producing all the details and evidences as are required in support of the claim. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. Now we take up appeals in ITA No. 79 to 82/Ctk/2025 for the A.Y. 2013- 14 to 2015-16. In these appeals also, there are also delay in filing of appeals before the Tribunal. Since we have condoned the delay in filing appeal in ITA No. 78/Ctk/2026 before the Tribunal and restored the issues back to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication on merit, therefore, keeping in view the principle of consistency on similar set of facts, we also condone the delay in filing these appeals before this Tribunal and also restore these appeals back to the file of the Assessing Officer for readjudication the issues. In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 18/02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 18/02/2026 *Ranjan Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 78 to 82/Ctk/2026 Pravakar Patra Vs ITO 4 Copy to: 1. Assessee - Pravakar Patra, Badarampur, Bahudarada, Bhadrak-756112 (Odisha) 2. Revenue- I.T.O., Ward-Bhadrak. 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. CIT 5. DR 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cuttack Printed from counselvise.com "