AMAN RAJESH PADAMSEY,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 7 3, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.396/PUN/2026 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Aman Rajesh Padamsey, Vs. ITO, Ward-7(3), Pune. A 25 26 Mantri Memories, Lane No.5, South Main Road, KP, Pune- 411001. PAN : COYPP5075A Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Pawan Jain Revenue by Shri Dayanand Jawalikar (Virtual) : Date of hearing : 14.05.2026 Date of pronouncement : 15.05.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.01.2026 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not furnished his return of income for the year under consideration. On the basis of information available with the Department that the assessee has purchased an immovable property for a consideration of Rs.54,96,000/-, the sources

2 ITA No.396/PUN/2026 remained unexplained since the return of income was not furnished, accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act and subsequently notice dated 06.04.2022 u/s 148 of the IT Act was issued to the assessee. Further notices u/s 142(1) and show cause notices respectively were issued to the assessee, however the assessee did not responded and therefore the Assessing Officer vide order dated 05.02.2024 completed the assessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by determining income of Rs.54,96,000/- as against no return filed by the assessee. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.54,96,000/- being unexplained investment in purchase of property u/s 69 of the IT Act. 3. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the appeal was filed belatedly i.e. with a delay of 214 days, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without going into merits of the case. 4. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, it was submitted

3 ITA No.396/PUN/2026 that the property was purchased by mother of the assessee and the name of the assessee was added as a co-owner being 18 years old son, only for the purposes of succession and convenience and the assessee has not made any financial contribution since he was only a student. It was also the contention that the assessee left India on 26.03.2019 for higher studies in Germany and since then he is residing over there and the notices of hearing were sent on his email ID which he could not see since residing in abroad and focusing on his studies only. Due to above reasons, he could not attend the hearing provided by the Assessing Officer which resulted in unfortunate ex-parte assessment order. On receipt of physical demand notice by his parents, the appeal was furnished before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with the delay of 214 days. Accordingly, it was the prayer of the assessee that if one opportunity is provided to the assessee to appear before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, he is in a position to substantiate his case. 6. 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 his file with a direction to condone the delay and decide the appeal afresh and as

4 ITA No.396/PUN/2026 per fact and law after 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, evidences and submissions, 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 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 on this 15th day of May, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (VINAY BHAMORE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 15th May, 2026. Sujeet/DOC Sujeet Kumar Digitally signed by Sujeet Kumar Sharma Sharma Date: 2026.05.18 11:22:52 आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : +05'30' अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.