ANAND PRABHAKAR YARGOLE,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, SANGLI

Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation as the assessee has filed the appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 82 days. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay. On due consideration of the said reasons, we find that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the 2 Anand Prabhakar Yargole stipulated time limit. We 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 of 82 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

Facts of the case in brief as emanating from the record are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed the return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act for A.Y. 2016-17. Based on the information available with the department that assessee has purchased immovable property valued at Rs.60,99,525/- and has received salary of Rs.1,86,290/-, the case of the assessee reopened u/s.147 of the Act for verification of source of purchase of the property. Valid statutory notices u/s.148 and u/s.142(1) were issued along with a questionnaire asking the assessee to submit the details. However, there was no response to such notices. In the absence of any reply, ld. Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act making addition of Rs.39,72,501/- towards unexplained investment u/s.69 of the Act.

Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) contending that assessee is residing in USA and has purchased the property out of his own savings and obtaining loan from bank and sought some time for collating the information and submitting the response. However, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine and now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal assailing the impugned order.

Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee is a non-resident and has applied his income earned from outside for the purpose of making investment in the immovable property. Reference also made to the summary of income from salary earned in United States of America along with bank statement of ICICI NRO Account and NRE Account. Details are appearing in pages 6 to 46 of the paper book. On the strength of these details, ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed that the asessee has sufficient funds to explain the source of investment in the immovable property for which ld. Assessing Officer has made addition for unexplained investment at Rs.39,72,501/-.

Ld. Departmental Representative on the other hand opposed the arguments advanced by the assessee and relied on the order of ld.CIT(A).

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. The assessee by way of grounds of appeal seeks one more opportunity to substantiate the real income of the assessee chargeable to tax in India by restoring the issue to the file of ld. Juri ictional Assessing Officer. It is an admitted fact that ld. Assessing Officer as well as the ld.CIT(A) decided the appeal exparte in the absence of any response from the side of assessee. We have perused the impugned order passed by ld.CIT(A) dismissing the appeal by observing as under :

On perusal of the above finding and the arguments advanced by the asseessee demonstrating the actual facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate the investment made in the immovable property by filing the requisite details. In view thereof, we remit the issue to the file of ld. Juri ictional Assessing Officer for afresh adjudication on merits in accordance with law. Needless to mention that ld. JAO shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and on due consideration of details shall decide in accordance with law. Assessee is directed to update email and contact detail on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.JAO shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Impugned order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is set aside and 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.

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,