ABDUL RAHMAN ABDUL RAB CHOUDHARY,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 9(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 2226/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 September 2026AY 2012-134 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the reasonable cause presented by the assessee. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the issues were remitted back for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT after a significant delay, claiming they were unaware of the CIT(A)'s order. This lack of awareness stemmed from a previous tax consultant's failure to comply with notices. The assessee only learned of the order when the AO sought information years later.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT was caused by a reasonable cause, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication due to the assessee's lack of awareness of prior proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri Sankalp Malik, Adv

For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar

Hearing: 01.09.2026Pronounced: 09.09.2026

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 04.05.2017 of ld.CIT(A), Pune-13 which is arising out of Assessment Order dated 02.03.2015 passed u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

Registry has pointed out that there is a delay in filing appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee filed a condonation application wherein it is stated that assessment order was passed on 02.03.2015. Assessee has filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) on 17.03.2016 which came to be passed partly allowing the appeal in 2 Abdul Rahman Abdul Rab Choudhary

favour of the assessee on 04.05.2017. Thereafter, assessee received notice dated 23.12.2025 from the ld.Assessing Officer seeking some information to verify the claim after 9 years which reads as under :

Sub-Submission of supporting documents in support of your claim-reg

01.

Kindly refer to the above.

02.

As you have filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A) against assessment order dated 02.03.2015 and now the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order on 04.05.2017 and directed this office to give effect to order to the Ld. CIT(A)'s order, after verification of assessee's documents in support of his/her claim.

03.

You are requested to submit supporting documents regarding your claim in this office by 29.12.2025 so that OGE to the Ld. CIT(A)'s order may be passed accordingly.

1 Assessee submitted that it was only through this notice assessee came to be know about passing of appellate order. Immediately, assessee filed adjournment letter dated 07.01.2026 (uploaded on e-portal) stating that he is neither aware of the notices, assessment proceedings nor about the appellate authority notices, and also about the passing of appellate order on 04.05.2017. It is also contended in the said reply that earlier Tax Consultant failed to make compliance to any of the notices which resulted in passing of the orders. In support, assessee vide condonation of application placed reliance on the Judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Secretary, Department of Horticulture, Chandigarh and Anr Vs. Raghu Raj (2008) 13 SCC 293 and the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rafiq Vs. Munshilal (1981) 2 SCC 788. We also find that assessee addressed letters dated 07.01.2026, 12.02.2026, 27.04.2026 seeking the documents related to his case. He also filed an RTI

3 Abdul Rahman Abdul Rab Choudhary

application dated 28.04.2026 seeking the certified copies of the documents viz., notices, submissions/replies filed during assessment proceedings, order sheet, assessment order, Form No. 35, written submissions, date of serving of notices etc.

We have gone through the reasons as demonstrated by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. We find that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee could not file the appeal before this Tribunal within the stipulated time. On due consideration of the reasons for delay in filing of appeal before Tribunal, we find that the delay is neither deliberate nor 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.

Considering the peculiar facts in the instant case and also the arguments advanced by the ld. Counsel for the assesee, we in the larger interest of justice set aside the impugned order passed by ld.CIT(A) and remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. However, in order to ensure compliance and co-operation by the assessee during the appellate proceedings before the ld.CIT(A), we direct the assessee to take steps to get the correct email address and postal/communication address on record before the ld.CIT(A) and at the ITBA Portal. Assessee is directed to be vigilant and track the appellate proceedings through ITBA Portal. Assessee is also directed to file all relevant details, documents and submission before the ld.CIT(A) on receiving notice of hearing and refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable

4 Abdul Rahman Abdul Rab Choudhary

cause. Ld. CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate the appeal afresh in accordance with law after granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 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 09th day of September, 2026. (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 09th September, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Madishetty Date: 2026.09.09 13:58:21 +05'30'

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

2.3.

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

////

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →