Case Law Details
Harichandanpur LAMPS Vs ITO (ITAT Cuttack)
In the case of Harichandanpur LAMPS vs. ITO, the ITAT Cuttack addressed an appeal against a January 23, 2024 order from the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-2018. Although the appeal was delayed by 69 days, the ITAT condoned this delay after finding no serious objection from the CIT-DR. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to the assessee’s non-compliance and lack of documentary evidence to support their claims. Recognizing the need for fairness, the ITAT restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for readjudication, instructing that the assessee be given a proper opportunity to present their case. The ITAT’s decision is a partial allowance of the appeal, aimed at ensuring the issues are reviewed justly. Also Read: SC explains rules for condonation of delay and Principals of Condonation of delay
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CUTTACK
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 23.01.2024, passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, passed in I.T.Appeal No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1060033460(1), for the assessment year 2017-2018.
2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, however, the assessee has filed an adjournment application wherein the ground seeking adjournment is not acceptable, hence, we reject the adjournment
3. In this appeal, there is a delay of 69 days in filing the present The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating sufficient reasons therein for delay. Ld. CIT-DR has also no serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, we condone the delay of 69 days in filing the present appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal finally
4. A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), in para 7, clearly shows that there was non-compliance by the assessee during the appellate proceedings, thereby the ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not serious to pursue its appeal and accordingly, dismissed the appeal of the assessee. A further perusal of the assessment order, clearly shows that the assessee has not substantiated its claim by submitting any documentary evidence. This being so, in the interest of justice and to grant the assessee adequate opportunities to substantiate its case, the issues in this appeal are restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard.
5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 01/08/2024.
Author Bio
