SUDESHNA PRADHAN,PURBA MEDINIPUR V. DCIT, WARD 27(1), , HALDIA

ITA 825/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sudeshna Pradhan, the appellant, contesting an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. The appeal was initially dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(Appeals) due to the appellant's absence at the hearing, which the appellant later claimed was due to unawareness of the hearing dates and the subsequent order. The ITAT found merit in the appellant's claim of unawareness and condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal, remitting the case back to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 668827 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" ITA No. 825/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Sudeshna Pradhan 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Vice-President (KZ) I.T.A. No. 825/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Sudeshna Pradhan,…………………..….………Appellant C/o. M/s. Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700072 [PAN:ALPPP9150Q] -Vs.- Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,.…….Respondent Ward-27(1), Haldia, Basudevpur, Talpukur, Khanjan Chak, Haldia, Midnapore-721101, West Bengal Appearances by: Shri S. Jhajharia, FCA, appeared on behalf of the assessee Shri Kallol Mistry, JCIT, Sr. D.R., appeared on behalf of the Revenue Date of concluding the hearing: June 24, 2025 Date of pronouncing the order: June 26, 2025 O R D E R The present appeal is directed at the instance of assessee against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 16th October 2023 passed for Assessment Year 2017-18. ITA No. 825/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Sudeshna Pradhan 2 2. The appeal is time barred by 852 days in filing the appeal by the assessee. However, the assessee filed an affidavit dated 3rd April, 2025 saying that the assessee was not aware of any notices of hearing and the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer an appeal, due to that there was a delay of 852 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded to condone the delay. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the assessee was prevented in filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Therefore, I am inclined to condone the delay of 852 days. Hence the delay is condoned. 4. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without going into the merit of the case. He further submitted that the assessee was not aware of the date of hearing before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the assessee was not in a position to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative submitted that sufficient opportunity was being provided to the assessee but the assessee failed to appear before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the ld. CIT(Appeals) has no other option except dismissing the appeal and he pleaded to uphold the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). ITA No. 825/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Sudeshna Pradhan 3 6. I have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record. The ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an affidavit mentioning the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT. Therefore, in order to ensure the principle of natural justice, I am of the view that it is a fit case to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, I remit the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(Appeals) with a direction to dispose of the appeal without any inference on the observations of earlier order passed by him. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26/06/2025. Sd/- (Duvvuru RL Reddy) Vice-President (KZ) Kolkata, the 26th day of June, 2025 Copies to :(1) Sudeshna Pradhan, C/o. M/s. Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 7, C.R. Avenue, 3rd Floor, Kolkata-700072 (2) Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward-27(1), Haldia, Basudevpur, Talpukur, Khanjan Chak, Haldia, Midnapore-721101, West Bengal ITA No. 825/KOL/2025 (A.Y. 2017-2018) Sudeshna Pradhan 4 (3) CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi; (4) CIT - , Kolkata; (5) The Departmental Representative; (6) Guard File TRUE COPY By order Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata Laha/Sr. P.S. "