SAHIL ANAND KOTHARI,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 8, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1055/PUN/2026Status: HeardITAT Pune11 August 2026AY 2022-234 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals and admitted the additional evidence. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order for de-novo adjudication, allowing the assessee to file additional evidence and granting an opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to furnish submissions before the CIT(A) despite multiple opportunities, leading to confirmation of additions. The assessee claimed to be outside India during the period of non-compliance and sought to admit additional evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming additions without adjudicating the grounds of appeal, and whether additional evidence should be admitted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 271AAC(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Jain
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde-CIT DR

आदेश /ORDER

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : These two appeals are filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [Ld.CIT(A)], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for AY 2022-23 on 28.11.2025.

2.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. For the sake of convenience and since issue involved is same, these two appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.

3.

There was a delay of 32 days in filing of both the appeals before this Tribunal. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay. We have perused the affidavit and convinced that there was sufficient cause for delay. Substantial justice is more important than procedural delay. No assessee is

ITA Nos.1055 & 1056/PUN/2026 going to gain by filing the appeal belatedly. Accordingly, delay condoned in both the appeals.

4.

First, we shall take up the appeal in ITA No. 1055/PUN/2026.

Findings and analysis:

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, the Ld. CIT(A) in para 5.8 has held as under : “5.8 In view of the above discussion, it is established that in-spite of providing several opportunities, the appellant has not furnished any submission in support of the grounds of appeal during the appeal proceeding. Hence, I see no reason to disturb the categorical findings of the assessing officer regarding total additions of Rs.13,80,97,721/- . Hence, grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are dismissed.”

5.1 Thus, it can be observed that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the addition stating that the assessee had failed to file submission in response to three notices. However, the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds raised by the assessee. It is mandatory for Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds raised by the assessee. In this case, the Ld. AR also filed additional evidences and application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 29 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Rules. We have perused the affidavit filed by the assessee for admission of additional evidences and noted that during the period the assessee was outside India and hence could not comply before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee filed documentary evidences which is at page Nos. 110-116 of the paper book to prove that the assessee was outside India during the period. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we are convinced that there was reasonable cause for the assessee for non-compliance before the AO and the Ld. CIT(A). Hence, we admit the additional evidences filed by the assessee in form of

ITA Nos.1055 & 1056/PUN/2026

paper book. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. The assessee shall be allowed to file additional evidences. The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee and the AO. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

ITA No. 1056/PUN/2026

7.

In this case, penalty has been levied by the AO u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act. There was no compliance before the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) during the proceedings. We have already set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication in ITA No. 1055/PUN/2026 for the elaborate reasons discussed above. For the same reasons, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication in ITA No. 1056/PUN/2026. The Ld. CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee and the AO. The assessee shall file additional evidences. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

8.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 11th August, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 11-08-2026 Digitally signed by Ravi Ravi Kumar Ravi Kumar Kumar Date: 2026.08.12 09:34:18 +05'30'

ITA Nos.1055 & 1056/PUN/2026

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr. CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 271AAC(1)

All 1,211 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271AAC(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →