SHREE GAJANAN PRATHAMIK PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,BELAGAVI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, BELAGAVI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 57/PAN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Panaji22 May 2026AY 2018-20194 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the assessee and pass a speaking order.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to non-compliance and failure to appear on multiple hearing dates. The assessee sought one more opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after their appeal was dismissed in limine due to non-appearance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 69,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI

Before: HON’BLE MANISH BORAD & HON’BLE PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Respondent: Ms. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR (Virtual)

आदेश / ORDER

PER MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 13.06.2025 pertaining to A.Y 2018-19 is arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 14.02.2024.

2.

Registry has pointed out that the appeal barred by limitation as the assessee has filed the appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 147 days. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay. On due consideration of the said

ITA 57/PAN/2026 SHREE GAJANAN PRATHAMIK PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT reasons, we find that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the 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 147 days in filing the appeals before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

With the assistance of both the sides, we on perusal of the impugned order find that due to non compliance by the assessee ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal in- limine and has not adjudicated on the merits of the case. Only prayer of ld. Counsel for the assessee is to afford one more opportunity to come before ld. CIT(A).

4.

On the other hand ld. DR has not strongly objected to the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. The assessee is a partnership firm and assessment for A.Y 2018-19 has been concluded u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act and against the income of Rs. 7,61,797/- declared in the return filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act, ld. AO has made addition for unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act at Rs. 2,28,22,101/- and assessed the total income at Rs. 2,35,83,900/-. Thereafter, the assessee appeal before ld. CIT(A) but failed to appear on the dates of hearing on six occasions during the period 30.01.2025 to 01.04.2025 as a result of which ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in- limine.

6.

We however considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, and also in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, deem it appropriate to affored one more opportunity to the assessee and without dwelling

ITA 57/PAN/2026 SHREE GAJANAN PRATHAMIK PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT upon the merits of the case, restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to decide in accordance with law by way of passing a speaking order as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that the ld. CIT(A) shall afford reasonable and proper opportunity to the assessee. Further, we direct the assessee to remain cooperative in furnishing the details called for by the ld. CIT(A). Finding of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 22.05.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE MANISH BORAD JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji/Pune Dated: 22.05.2026

Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.05.26 14:41:28 +05'30'

ITA 57/PAN/2026 SHREE GAJANAN PRATHAMIK PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT

Copy to: SHREE GAJANAN PRATHAMIK PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT, AT POST SANKONATTI, TAL. ATHANI. DIST. 1 BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI-591304, KARNATAKA ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, 2 OPP CIVIL HOSPITAL, DR AMBEDKAR ROAD, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI-590001, KARNATAKA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, PANAJI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →