ALARD CHARITABLE TRUST,PUNE vs. ACIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2884/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 May 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the circumstances, the Tribunal restored the issues to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a significant delay. The assessee requested that the issues be set aside to the CIT(A) due to inability to make proper compliance, including a delay in furnishing Form 10B.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing Form 10B and the assessee's inability to make proper compliance warrant setting aside the matter to the lower appellate authority for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jha
For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Hearing: 23.03.2026Pronounced: 12.05.2026

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 27.05.2024 framed by Addl/JCIT(A), Kolkata arising out of Intimation Order dated 31.03.2019 passed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

Registry has pointed out that there is delay of 485 days in filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reason which led to delay. On due consideration of the averments made in the affidavit, we are satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. We note that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore 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 485 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to Ground No.1 has requested to set aside the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) as the assessee could not make proper compliance due to reasons beyond control of the assessee resulting into passing of exparte order. He also requested that one of the ground for which alleged addition is on account of delay in furnishing of Form 10B.

4.

On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A).

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Considering the fact that assessee did not plead before ld.CIT(A) through his participation inspite of being provided sufficient opportunity and also observing that for making the impugned addition there is delay in furnishing of Form 10B, the issues raised in the instant appeal are restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Ld.CIT(A) shall decide the issue in accordance with settled judicial precedents on the issue as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act by providing reasonable opportunity of hearing in the set aside proceedings. Assessee is directed to update email id and contact detail on the ITBA portal for receiving the notices from the Department. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise

required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

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

Order pronounced on this 12th day of May, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 12th May, 2026. Satish

Satish Kumar Madishetty 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 →