1004 Day Delay Condoned: ITAT Kolkata Criticises Lack of Hearing, Remands Case for Fresh Consideration:

ITAT condoned a 1004-day delay and ordered fresh adjudication after finding ex parte tax proceedings violated principles of natural justice, while dismissing one appeal and partly allowing the other.
ITAT Kolkata Flags Violation of Natural Justice

1004 Day Delay Condoned: ITAT Kolkata Criticises Lack of Hearing, Remands Case for Fresh Consideration
The ITAT Kolkata recently decided two appeals filed by an assessee. The cases involved delays, a lack of representation, and multiple ex parte orders passed by tax authorities. Overall, the tribunal allowed one appeal and quashed the other.
The assessee, Ram Kishor Mandal, had filed the present two appeals, challenging two orders dated March 02, 2022, and August 21, 2024, passed by the PCIT and the CIT(A), NFAC Delhi, respectively, for the Assessment Year 2017-18.
During the hearing before the ITAT Kolkata, the assessee (Ram Kishor Mandal) claimed the impugned assessment order was passed without granting an opportunity of hearing (ex parte). Further submitted that all the impugned notices sent by the Income Tax Department were sent to his Chartered Accountant (CA), and he did not inform him.
The assessee only became aware of the tax proceedings after the demand notices were issued to him, which ultimately caused a delay of 1004 days in filing the appeals. The tribunal condoned the delay in the interest of justice despite no complaint or affidavit being submitted against the CA and highlighted that fairness should prevail over technicalities.
When the tribunal analysed the facts of the case, it noted that the original assessment and revision proceedings were completed without hearing the assessee, which is an explicit violation of the principles of natural justice. The tax authorities had identified issues such as unexplained cash deposits in multiple bank accounts. The assessee argued that the Section 263 revision order does not fall under the scope of the limited investigation, but the Tribunal did not accept this argument, pointing out that the assessee’s non-cooperation restricted proper examination during assessment.
The tribunal held, "We grant one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case, and the issues in ITA No. 98/Pat/2015 are restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard."
As a result, the Tribunal sustained the revision order under Section 263 and dismissed one appeal of the assessee. However, considering that the final assessment and appellate orders were also passed ex parte, the tribunal decided to send the case back to the tax authorities for fresh consideration and directed them to, this time, grant the assessee a fair opportunity to represent his case. In conclusion, one appeal was dismissed, while the other was partly allowed for statistical purposes.
About Author

Saloni Kumari
Content Writer
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
Saloni is a Content Writer with 2+ years of experience at studycafe.in. She writes legal, taxation, and finance related content including GST, Income Tax etc. Skilled in translating complex judicial pronouncements and regulatory developments into clear, and reader-friendly articles. Experienced in covering judgements of ITAT, High Court, GSTAT, and news related to Income Tax, GST, and corporate law. She can be reached at [email protected].
StudyCafe
Delhi, Delhi, India
2450My Recent Articles
- ITAT Deletes Rs 12 Lakh Section 68 Addition After Assessee Proves Lender’s Identity, Creditworthiness and Genuine TransactionPremium
- ITAT Holds Approval Should Be Taken from PCCIT under Section 151(ii) When Section 148 Notice Is After 3-Year Time LimitPremium
- ITAT Sets Aside CIT(E)’s Rejection of Charitable Trust’s Section 12AB Registration and 80G Approval ApplicationsPremium
- ITAT Upholds Section 148 Reopening But Restricts Rs 30 Lakh Accommodation Entry Addition To 5%, Cites Double TaxationPremium
- Claiming Full TDS Credit Without Reporting Entire Income Is Underreporting, Not Misreporting: ITAT Premium
Up Next
Loading suggestions…
Recent Posts

All Posts

Recent Posts

All Posts








