CHANDRAKANT SHIVARAM DHORE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(3), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1941/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 March 2026AY 2014-156 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed solely on the grounds of delay. The merits of the case were not considered by the lower appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee is an individual who did not file his return of income. Information was received by the department regarding the sale of an immovable property by the assessee on 04.03.2014. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed due to a delay of 573 days.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed before the CIT(A)/NFAC should be admitted despite the delay, or if the delay should be condoned for adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Shri Jasraj Sutar
For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR

O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16.06.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2014-15.

2.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee on account of delay of 573 days.

3.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income. Information was available with the department that the assessee along with others had sold an immovable property vide registered deed dated 04.03.2014 registered before the Sub-

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →