Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ranchi
Akshay Kumar,Jamshedpur vs Ito, Ward 1(1), Jamshedpur on 9 October, 2025
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND
SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
ITA No. 434/Ran/2024
(Assessment Year-2018-19)
Akshay Kumar, I.T.O.,
3/B, Subhash Colony, Dimna Road, Ward-1(1),
Jamshedpur, Jharkhand-831012. Vs. Jamshedpur.
PAN No. BAPPK 6029 M
Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue
Assessee represented by Shri Aditya Mohan Khandelwal, A.R.
Department represented by Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR
Date of hearing 09/10/2025
Date of pronouncement 09/10/2025
ORDER
PER: BENCH
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No. NFAC/2017-18/10293338 dated 25/09/2024 for the A.Y. 2018-19
2. Shri Aditya Mohan Khandelwal, ld AR appeared for the assessee and Shri Khubchand T Pandya, Sr.DR appeared for the revenue.
3. It was submitted by ld AR that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of delay. It was a submission that the ld. CIT(A) has held that there is delay of 161 days in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) which has not been condoned by him. It was a submission that it was a mistake when filing of the appeal that the delay were specifically mentioned. It was a submission that the delay was on account of misconnection between the assessee and the counsel. It was a submission that the delay may be condoned and issues may be restored to the file of Assessing Officer. In so far as, even ITA No. 434/Ran/2024 Akshay Kumar Vs ITO before the Assessing Officer, the assessee is ex parte as the assessee did not have much knowledge about the computers and the notices on online portal was not responded by the assessee.
4. In reply, the ld. Sr.DR vehemently supported the order of Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A).
5. We have considered the rival submissions. It is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of 161 days in filing the appeal before him. It is also not disputed that the delay was on account of communication deficiency between the assessee and the counsel, in these circumstances, in the interest of justice, the delay in filing the appeal before, the ld. CIT(A) stands condoned. As the assessment order is also an ex parte order, therefore, in the interest of justice, the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee subject to the payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- deposited with Jharkhand Income Tax Bar Association to be paid within 60 days from the date of issue of this order. In the event, the cost is not paid and the receipt is not produced before the Assessing Officer, at the date of first hearing, the order of the ld CIT(A) shall stand confirmed.
6. In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order announced in open court on 09/10/2025.
Sd/- Sd/-
(RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ranchi, Dated: 09/10/2025
*Ranjan
2
ITA No. 434/Ran/2024
Akshay Kumar Vs ITO
Copy to:
1. Assessee
2. Revenue
3. CIT
4. DR By order
5. Guard File
Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi
3