" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं/ITA No.2225/KOL/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Vijay Kalani, Satyam Mobile Point, Shabana Market, Asansol Burdwan-713303 Vs ITO Ward-1(1), Asansol PAN No. :AOMPK 7766 B (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Vijay Kalani, assessee in person रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Nicholas Murmu, Sr. DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 06/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 06/05/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.05.2024, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi in DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065240524(1) for the assessment year 2017-2018. 2. Shri Vijay Kalani, the assessee is present in person. Shri Nicholas Murmu, ld. Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. The appeal of the assessee is delayed by 1738 days delay. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application along with affidavit starting therein that his father was suffering from heart blockage for which the assessee was busy for treatment of his father. The assessee has enclosed medical documents in respect of treatment of his father. Thus, the reasons stated by the assessee are found to be genuine to which ld. Sr. DR did not object to it. Therefore, the delay of 1738 days as pointed out by the Registry ITA No.2225/KOL/2024 2 in filing of the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is disposed off accordingly. 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that the assessee could not appear either before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings or before the ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings. In this regard, ld. AR stated before us that his son was under treatment for muscle dystrophy, therefore, the assessee was unable to appoint the necessary counsel or representative for making the submission before the authorities below. It was submitted that he may be granted another opportunity to represent before the Assessing Officer for which the assessee would be enable to provide all the details before the Assessing Officer. 5. In reply, ld. Sr. DR did not raise any serious objections. 6. We have considered the rival submissions. As it is noticed that the assessee has provided reasons for non-appearance before both the authorities below, therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of Assessing Officer for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 06/05/2025. Sd/- (SANJAY AWASTHI) Sd/- (GEORGE MATHAN) लेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यधनयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कोलकाता Kolkata; ददनाांक Dated 06/05/2025 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. ITA No.2225/KOL/2024 3 आदेश की प्रनतललपप अग्रेपर्त/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant- 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent- 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A), 4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 5. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण, कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यापपत प्रतत //True Copy// "