PUSHPA BALASAHEB MALI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PMT BUILDING, SWARGATE PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 957/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 August 2026AY 2015-165 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order. The case was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, providing the assessee with an opportunity to present evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance. The Assessing Officer had made additions for unexplained cash deposits and claimed exemption on sale of agricultural land without sufficient substantiation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 69A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

Hearing: 20.08.2026Pronounced: 24.08.2026

आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER,

Assistant Registrar, आयकरअिीिीयअतिकरण,/ ITAT, Pune. -

ITA.No.957/PUN/2026 Pushpa Balasaheb Mali

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →