TARUN SAHU,BIRBHUM V. COMPETANT AUTHORITY, NAFAC, DELHI

ITA 208/KOL/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals by Tarun Sahu against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The appeals were related to the quantum of income assessed and a penalty under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was the significant delay in filing the appeals, attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic and the assessee's hospitalization. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's reasons for the delay, leading to the decision to condone the delay and remand the case for re-assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 33197 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAILEN SAMADDER
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMIT GHOSH; SOURADEEP
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 250; 208

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 208 & 209/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Tarun Sahu Taljhari, Nischintapur, Rampurhar-1, Birbhum, West Bengal-731224. (PAN: BCCPS2602H Vs. Assessing Officer, National e- Assessment Centre, Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Sumit Ghosh, Advocate & Shri Souradeep Majumdar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Sailen Samadder, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 01.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 01.04.2025 O R D E R Per Bench : Both these appeals filed by the assessee are against the orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order Nos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1070762913(1) and ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070759092(1) both dated 29.11.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2018-19. Since grounds are common and facts are identical, we dispose of both these appeals together by this consolidated order. 2. Shri Sumit Ghosh, Advocate & Shri Souradeep Majumdar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Sailen Samadder, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 2 ITA No. 208 & 209/Kol/2025 Tarun Sahu, AY: 2018-19 3. ITA No. 208/Kol/2025 is against the quantum decided by the Ld. CIT(A) and ITA No. 209/Kol/2025 is against the penalty confirmed u/s. 270 of the Act. 4. It was submitted by the Ld. AR in the appeal of the assessee in the quantum proceedings in ITA No. 208/Kol/2025, that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay of 994 days. It was the submission that in regard to the penalty u/s 270 of the Act, which is an appeal against the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay of 862 days. It was the submission that if the COVID period is excluded, then the delay of nearly 300 days would have been excluded and for the balance period of delay, the assessee was hospitalised and was under the medical treatment for which the assessee has filed necessary medical certificates and the hospitalisation record. It was the prayer that the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) may be condoned and the issue is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 5. In reply, the Ld. CIT, DR contended that the assessee has not cooperated in the assessment proceeding. However, in the interest of justice the issues may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re- adjudication. 6. We have heard the rival submissions. Admittedly, as mentioned by the Ld. Sr. DR, the assessee has not appeared before the Assessing Officer and provided all the details as sought by the Assessing Officer. This being so in both the appeals being the quantum appeal and the penalty proceeding, in the interest of justice the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in these appeals are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 3 ITA No. 208 & 209/Kol/2025 Tarun Sahu, AY: 2018-19 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court. Sd/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mishra) (George Mathan) Accountant Member Judicial Member Dated: 1st April, 2025 JD, Sr. P.S. Copy to: 1. The Appellant: Shri Tarun Sahu 2. The Respondent. Assessing Officer, National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi 3. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata Bench, Kolkata 6. Guard file. True Copy By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata "