आयकर अपील(cid:547)य अ(cid:876)धकरण Ûयायपीठ रायपुर म(cid:581)।

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.364 to 368/RPR/2023 (cid:467)नधा(cid:91)रण वष (cid:91) / Assessment Years : 2012-13 to 2016-17 Block Education Officer G.E. Road, Durg-491 001 (C.G.)

PAN: JBPBO1308G ........अपीलाथ(cid:568) / Appellant बनाम / V/s.

The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bhilai (C.G.)

……(cid:292)×यथ(cid:568) / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Yogesh Sethia, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Hearing : 03.04.2025 घोषणा क(cid:551) तार(cid:547)ख / Date of Pronouncement : 03.04.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER BENCH:

The captioned appeals preferred by the assessee emanates from the respective orders of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 12.09.2022 and 13.09.2022 for the assessment years 2012-13 to 2016-17 as per the grounds of appeal on record.

2. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted brief synopsis regarding the facts/developments in these appeals as follows:

(i) The captioned appeals were initially filed before the Tribunal which were time barred by 384/383 days;

(ii) The Tribunal vide its order dated 29.01.2024 dismissed the appeals of the assessee for A.Y.2012-13 to 2016-17 on the ground of delay without adjudicating on merits of the case;

(iii) Thereafter, the assessee filed miscellaneous applications before the Tribunal in MA Nos.18 to 22/RPR/2024 and the Tribunal recalled the matters vide its order dated 10.03.2025 after condoning the delay relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 26310-26311/2024, dated

31.01.2025 wherein it was held as under:

“3. An appeal was preferred by the appellant before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench wherein there was a delay of 166 days. The Tribunal declined to condone the delay. An appeal was preferred against the said order by the appellant before the High Court. Even the appeal has been dismissed.

4. In our view, both the Tribunal and the High Court ought to have adopted justice oriented and liberal approach by condoning the delay of 166 days.

5. Therefore, we set aside both the impugned orders by condoning the delay in preferring the appeal bearing ITA No.351/RPR/2023.

6. We direct that the Director of the Tribunal to decide the appeal in accordance with law.”

At this juncture, the captioned appeals are again fixed for hearing today i.e.

on 03.04.2025 before the Tribunal.

3. At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel submitted that as per Para 4 of the impugned orders for all the assessment years, the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC vide an ex-parte order had dismissed the appeals of the assessee due to non-compliance by the assessee. For the sake of clarity, Para 4 of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)’s/NFAC order are culled out as follows:

“4. Submission for the appellant dt:-

No submissions have been made by the appellant despite several opportunities given.”

4. The Ld. Sr. DR has fairly conceded that the matters may be adjudicated denovo on merits before the first appellate authority providing one final opportunity to the assessee.

5. We have carefully considered the contents in the documents/material available on record, submissions of both the parties. As per the aforesaid examination of the entire spectrum of the matter in the interest of natural justice, we deem it fit and proper to provide one final opportunity to the assessee to represent his case on merits before the Ld.

CIT(Appeals)/NFAC.

6. At this stage, we herein observe that the ITAT, “Division Bench”, Raipur in the cases of Brajesh Singh Bhadoria Vs. Dy./ACIT, Central Circle-2, Naya Raipur, IT(SS)A Nos. 1 to 6, 8 & 9/RPR/2025, dated 20.03.2025 had dealt with similar issue on the same parameters of ex- parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and re