Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee did not file their return of income for AY 2018-19. Re-assessment proceedings were initiated, leading to an addition of Rs. 47,77,000/-. The appeal before the CIT(A) was delayed by 199 days due to dependency on a consultant.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 199 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), citing reasonable cause and a justice-oriented approach. The issues were remitted back to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable and if the appeal should be adjudicated on merits.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 27.09.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) arising out of Assessment Order dated 29.02.2024 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s144 r.w.s144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to ‘reasonable cause’ appeal before ld.CIT(A) could not be furnished in time and there is delay of 199 days. However, ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. He therefore prayed that in the larger interest of justice the assessee may please be provided one more opportunity and issues raised in the instant appeal may be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication.
2 Shekhar Yadgiri Gajjal
On the other hand, ld. DR did not oppose the request made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee.
I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before me. I note that the assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. Based on the information about purchase and sale of immovable property and tax deducted at source on salary, the re-assessment proceedings u/s.147 were carried out but assessee failed to appear before the ld. Assessing Officer resulting into addition of Rs.47,77,000/- and the income assessed at the same amount. Assessee challenged the addition made by the Assessing Officer before ld.CIT(A) but the appeal was delayed by 199 days. The reasons were furnished before ld.CIT(A) stating that he was totally dependent upon the consultant looking after the tax work but he did not inform the assessee about the replies and compliances to be made. Considering the above averments made by the assessee and also adopting justice oriented approach, I find that the delay is not intentional and therefore placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A)
Since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues on merit, the issues in the instant appeal deserves to be remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues raised in 3 Shekhar Yadgiri Gajjal
the instant appeal are remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee on merits of the case as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceeding shall provide reasonable opportunity to the asseseee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and make satisfactory compliance to the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A) and should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 17th day of April, 2026. (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 17th April, 2026. Satish
Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.04.17 18:19:30 +05'30'
4 Shekhar Yadgiri Gajjal
आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
////