SURENDRA SHRIRAM SAKARKAR,AKOLA vs. ITO WARD-3, AKOLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 489/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur12 June 2026AY 2013-144 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay and set aside the impugned order. The case was remanded to the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee with a fresh opportunity of hearing and to pass a fresh order.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 61 days, attributing it to a professional's lapse. The original assessment order was passed ex-parte under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act due to the assessee's failure to respond to notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment order passed due to non-response to notices should be sustained, and the assessee should be given an opportunity to present their case on merits regarding capital gains on land with existing structures.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH :: NAGPUR

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Sr.DR
Hearing: 11.06.2026Pronounced: 12.06.2026

PER BENCH:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (for short, “CIT(A)”), dated 19/03/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “Act”) which is emanating from the assessment order dated 12.03.2022

ITA No. 489/NAG/2025 (Surendra Shriram Sakarkar) passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act by the ITO, Ward-3, Akola, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14.

2.

On hearing both the sides, we find that appeal is filed with a delay of 61 days and an application for condonation of delay has been filed, wherein it is claimed that assessee is an agriculturist and due to lack of professional assistance, there was a delay in filing the appeal. The contents of the application asserted that documents were handed-over to a particular CA, however he failed to file the appeal and even affidavit of the said professional accompanies the application. Considering that no assessee should suffer due to lapse on the part of any professional, the delay is condoned and we admit the appeal for hearing.

3.

Further, on hearing, it comes up that the impugned order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and the NFAC observes that assessee failed to respond to the notices thereby following the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. B.N. Bhattacharya (118 ITR 461)

ITA No. 489/NAG/2025 (Surendra Shriram Sakarkar) appeal was dismissed without any observations on merits. Learned counsel apprised the Bench that the issue involved is of consideration of capital gain on short term asset while the land has existing structure.

4.

Thus, in the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we consider it an appropriate case to allow the appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes and set aside the impugned order to the files of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) to give the assessee fresh opportunity of hearing and pass the order afresh.

5.

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

Order pronounced in open Court on 12.06.2026

sd/- sd/- ANUBHAV SHARMA KHETTRA MOHAN ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Nagpur: Dated:12/06/2026 vr/-

ITA No. 489/NAG/2025 (Surendra Shriram Sakarkar) Copy to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Revenue 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. The DR, ITAT, Nagpur 5. Guard file. By order Vukkem Digitally signed by Vukkem Rambabu Rambabu Date: 2026.06.15 10:58:44 +05'30' Senior Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →