SHRI MARUTI INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPER,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE-7, PUNE, PUNE

Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA 1589/PUN/2025:-

ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES PREVAILING IN CASE AND AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IT BE HELD AT ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX IS NOT JUSTIFIED AND PROPER AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR FOLLOWING REASONS

DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF LABOUR CHARGES OF RS. 2,11,335.

THE APPELLANT PRAYS TO ALLOW TO ADD AMEND MODIFY RECTIFY DELETE AND RAISED ANY GROUNDS OF APPEAL AT THE TIME OF HEARING.

The Id CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Labour charges of Rs. 2,18,440/- and Sundry balance written off of Rs. 7,13,299/-.

The Id CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Unabsorbed Depreciation loss of Rs. 17,53,742/-

The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or substitute any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.

On the facts and circumstances prevailing in case the Id CIT(A) erred in law and on facts is confirming disallowance of following - i. Bad debt of Rs. 76350876/- ii. Disallowance on accounts of labour charges of Rs. 738841/-

On the facts and circumstances prevailing in case the Id CIT(A) erred in law and on facts is confirming levy of Interest u/s 234A and 234B of Rs. 84,91,456/- and Rs. 1,91,05,776/- which is not as per provisions of the act, 1961.

The appellant prays to allow to add amend, modify, rectify, delete and raised any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.

Registry has pointed out that the appeals are barred by limitation as the assessee has filed the appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 700, 365 and 700 days. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay. On due consideration of the said reasons, we find that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee from filing the appeals within the stipulated time limit. We find that the delay is not intentional and therefore placing reliance on the judgements of the 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 judgement dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 700, 365 and 700 days in filing the appeals before this Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication.

At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assesse submitted that in the proceedings before Ld. CIT(A), assesse failed to appear and could not make any submissions and due to non-compliance, Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals of the assesse in limine for A.Y. 2013-14 to 2015-16. She only prayed for granting of an opportunity to appear

We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assesse is a Partnership Firm engaged in the business of construction and development. Assessment have been framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s 254 of the Act for A.Y. 2013-14 u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act for A.Y. 2014-15 and A.Y. 2015-16 wherein certain additions disallowance have been made. We observe that during the course of the appellate proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) no application was made for A.Y. 2013-14 resulting in dismissing the appeal in limine. For A.Y. 2014-15 and 2015-16 even though the Ld. CIT(A) has dealt with merits of the case it is observed that no submissions were filed by the assessee nor there is any reference for the notice of hearing issued by Ld. CIT(A) to the assessee for making submissions in supporting of grounds of appeal. Considering these facts and also request made by him we in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties deem it appropriate to restore all the issues raised on merits in the instant three appeals for A.Y. 2013- 14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and shall pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result all the three appeals of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes.