NITIN NARAYANRAO DAKH,SAILU vs. JURISDICTION ASSESSING OFFICER, HINGOLI

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal being barred by limitation as the assessee filed the appeals with a delay of 645 and 646 days. ‘reasonable cause’ and only requested for granting one more opportunity to go before ld.CIT(A) for adjudication of the issues on merit raised for the impugned assessment years. On the other hand, the Ld.DR objects to the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Appeals preferred by the individual assessee before Ld.CIT(A) against the assessment orders framed for A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y.2014-15 are delayed by 645 and 646 days respectively. Ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay. On going through the submissions filed by the assessee before us as well as ld.CIT(A) explaining the reasons for delay, we are satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee from filing the appeals before Ld.CIT(A) within the statutory time limit. In light thereof and also observing that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from filing the appeals with a delay, we in light of 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 645 and 646 days in filing of the appeals before Ld.CIT(A).

So far as merits of the case are concerned, we find that ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues raised on merits in the instant appeals. Therefore, considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to restore the issues raised on merits for both the impugned assessment years back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the issues, the issues raised in the instant appeals are being remitted to the file of ld.CIT(A). Needless to mention that in the set aside proceedings ld.CIT(A) shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to update email and contact details 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.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Impugned findings of Ld.CIT(A) are set aside and Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee for A.Y. 2013-14 and A.Y. 2014- 15 are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee vide ITA Nos. 3220 and 3221/PUN/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes.

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