MEGHANA PARESH JADHAV,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 10(1), AKURDI PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.3359/PUN/2025 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Meghana Paresh Jadhav, Vs. ITO, Ward-10(1), Pune. Vikram Vihar Flat No.2, Near Deodhar Hospital, Pimpri, Pune- 411017. PAN : CJTPS0690G Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pratik Sandbhor Revenue by Shri Vaibhav Madhavrao Dhere : (Virtual) Date of hearing : 21.07.2026 Date of pronouncement : 27.07.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 24.10.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the detailed submission along with supporting evidences of the appellant filed in the course of appellate proceedings. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in not taking cognizance of the fact that the cash deposits made by the appellant during demonetization are

2 ITA No.3359/PUN/2025 duly explained out of the earlier bank withdrawals and savings of mother of the appellant. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the cash deposits made during the demonetization period are completely explained out of the bank borrowing and saving of mother of the appellant and therefore the addition u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not sustainable and consequently the provision of section 271AAC cannot be invoked. 5. The above grounds of appeal may kindly be allowed to be altered, amended, modified, deleted etc in the interest of natural justice.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed her return for the year under consideration. On the basis of information on the income tax portal that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.13,15,684/- in her two bank accounts during demonetization period and failed to furnish return of income disclosing above transaction, therefore, the case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s 142(1) and 144 of the IT Act respectively were issued to the assessee. The assessee did not comply with any of the above notices, therefore, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 17.12.2019 completed the assessment proceedings u/s 144 of the IT Act by determining the income of the assessee at Rs.13,23,000/- as against no return filed by the assessee. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.13,15,500/- being unexplained money u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE

3 ITA No.3359/PUN/2025 of the IT Act and addition of Rs.7,500/- being undisclosed business income. 4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the appeal was furnished belatedly i.e. with a delay of 839 days, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of delay without going into merits of the case. 5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that it is the sole request of the counsel of the assessee that the matter may kindly be restored back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC so that the assessee can substantiate the grounds of appeal, since earlier, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC failed to decide merits of the case and dismissed the appeal only on the ground of delay for which the appellant was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause for not furnishing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC within the prescribed time limit. It was submitted that the return of the assessee were prepared by consultant Shri Haresh Advani whose email ID was registered on

4 ITA No.3359/PUN/2025 income tax portal and the assessee got married in the year 2018 and shifted to her in-laws in Warze, Pune and due to this reason, she was unaware with the ex-parte order passed by the Assessing Officer since her consultant Shri Haresh Advani never informed about the assessment proceedings or regarding ex-parte assessment order. After marriage, she delivered her baby on 02.01.2021 and thereafter due to Covid could not look into the tax matters which resulted in the delay, however as soon as she came to know about the ex-parte order, she hired another consultant and filed the impugned appeal belatedly. In support of above contentions an affidavit duly notarized was furnished by the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested to set-aside the impugned order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and further prayed to direct Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits of the case. 7. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits of the case and as per fact and law after

5 ITA No.3359/PUN/2025 providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and to produce relevant documents, submissions and evidences, if any, in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 27th day of July, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (VINAY BHAMORE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 27th July, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.07.27 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 16:23:25 +05'30' अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.