What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order, directing them to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits. The Tribunal relied on Supreme Court judgments emphasizing that substantial justice should be preferred over technical considerations in cases of non-deliberate delay.

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for being filed late. The assessee attributed the delay to issues with their tax consultant and the COVID-19 pandemic, claiming they were unaware of the assessment order and demand until their bank account was attached. The assessee also stated that their application under the Vivad se Vishwas scheme was rejected without their knowledge.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned, and if so, whether the appeal should be decided on its merits.

Manish Kishan Tirthani vs ITO | ITAT Pune 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Pathak

For Respondent: Shri Arvind Renge

आदेश /ORDER

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [Ld.CIT(A)], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) for AY 2017-18 on 16.02.2026, emanating from the Assessment Order u/s 143(3) of the Act, dated 23.12.2019.

Submission of Ld. AR:

The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessee has filed an affidavit of the authorized signatory in support thereof stating therein the reasons for the delay. The relevant paragraphs of the same reads as under : “I have been into business for over 10 years and have been filing my tax returns regularly. For making all the tax compliance I had retained a Tax Consultant who had been advising and guiding me with all the tax matters and attending to all the tax matters arising in my case from time to time. The Contact Details provided in the Tax Returns filed along with the E-mail id belonged to my Tax Consultant, Mr. A.Α. Momin who had been handling all the compliance matters. All the communications starting from the issuance of the Notice for

ITA No.1173/PUN/2026

hearing, the subsequent notices calling for the information, the passing of the Final Assessment Order raising a substantial demand were communicated to his email id. I am enclosing with this Affidavit, Snapshot of all these communications which bear testimony to what I said above.

I had attended to this case and submitted all the required information along with the copies of passbook, information relating to my business etc. for him to attend to the case from time to time. According to the information available to me from him, the case was being attended to on the Income Tax Portal and he had submitted all the required information from time to time when it had been called for. An Order was passed on 23rd December 2019 making a substantial addition to my Income and raising a very huge tax demand. This Order and Demand had also been similarly communicated to the tax consultant on his email id.

I was unaware about the happenings, was neither informed by the tax consultant nor had any other way of knowing this. The first time when I came to know that something was wrong and about the demand is in the month of March 2020 when my bank account was attached by the Income Tax Authorities for recovery of the tax demand. I was extremely shocked to know that the demand made from me by the tax department was Rs. 12.02 Lakhs which is in multiple of my yearly income.

I was alarmed and at dismay when I came to know about this and immediately visited by Tax Consultant to understand the reasons for the demand and also have all this resolved. In the meanwhile, national lockdown was announced and all the businesses, offices, establishments, Government Office etc. were closed which went for a very long time. After the lockdown was lifted in partial openings with conditions, I was first concerned with my business and the survival. I had also visited the tax consultant who informed me that the Tax Offices were not fully functional, and some offices were either closed or working only on some days based on their duties. He had however assured me that due to the COVID19, CBDT had extended all the dates and I was not to worry, and we had time to file the appeal, He also informed me the CBDT had ongoing scheme of Vivad se Vishwas scheme under which I could file an application and get the necessary relief required.

Due to lockdown and the business being down with frequent closures of the areas and areas being declared as Containment zone and restriction of the movements etc., I was mentally disturbed. However, from the Tax Front I was assured that the required application will be done and continued with this belief.

ITA No.1173/PUN/2026

With the follow-up with the consultant, I was informed by him that the Application was made under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme and he explained to me that this course was best suited to me for my case. With his advice and the filing of the Application, I was relieved from the anxiety and was under the belief that all that was required was done. He made the application under this scheme on 31st January 2021. I waited for the communication from him in respect of the result of the application made and the final solution to my problems. In the meanwhile, waiting for the feedback from the tax consultant I spoke to a business friend of mine and confided into him about the case. Based on this business friend's advice I met another Counsel to know exactly what was wrong with the case and why was taking time to settle and why I as unable to obtain the bank attachment release letter. I also understood for the first time from the new counsel that based on the assessment records, I was to pay a tax demand of Rs. 12.02 Lakhs on an addition of Rs. 11.62 Lakhs, which was not even my income. It came to me as a severe Jolt and shock when I understood what had gone wrong, why the demand was created and coupled with the fact that I had been given a wrong advice and that my Application under the Vivad se Vishwas Scheme had also been Rejected. I had not heard about the Rejection from my existing Tax Consultant. I had been under the bonafide belief till date that I had been following and doing things in time and the delay in various matters was due to the Carona Effect. Immediately upon this rude awakening I took positive step to change my consultant and follow the correct legal process, which I am doing so now. I fully understand my folly and mistake in the blind trust I reposed in the tax consultant and am very remorseful for that. Being under a tremendous mental stress I was not able to think through clearly. I am also mindful of the grave injustice that would be done to me if my case is not heard on facts and merits of my case and I don't get the opportunity to present my case before the Appellate Forum and for that reason seek condonation of delay with folded hands. I Mr. Manish Kisan Tirthani, am making the above affirmations and statements by giving in narrative all the facts that existed in my case and are within my knowledge.”

2.1 The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has a strong case on merits and therefore urged that, in the interest of justice, the Ld. CIT(A) may be directed to condone the delay in filing of the appeal and decide the case on merits, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee to represent his case before him by filing the requisite details.

ITA No.1173/PUN/2026

Submission of Ld. DR:

The Ld. DR relied on the order of Ld. CIT(A).

Findings and analysis:

We have heard both the parties and perused the record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as not admitted on account of delay in filing of the appeal without considering the assessee’s submissions on merits of the case. Before us, the Ld. AR has submitted that the appeal was delayed for the reasons reproduced in the preceding paragraphs. The Ld. AR submitted that the delay in filing of the appeal was not intentional but resulted due to the reasons cited in affidavit of the assessee filed before the Tribunal. The Ld. AR has humbly prayed that as the assessee has a strong case on merits, in the interest of justice, the Ld. CIT(A) may be directed to condone the delay and admit the assessee’s appeal and decide the case on merits.

We find the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC) has held that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties.

We find recently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 339 has held as under: "14. There can be no quarrel on the settled principle of law that delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, but a major aspect which has to be kept in mind is that, if in a particular case, the merits have to be examined, it should not be scuttled merely on the basis of limitation."

ITA No.1173/PUN/2026

In the light of the decision(s) of the Hon'ble Supreme Court (supra), we hereby set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to his file with a direction to condone the delay in filing the appeal before him by the assessee and decide the appeal on merits as per fact and law after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee shall comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and make his submissions before him on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, unless required for the sufficient cause, failing which the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The effective grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 16th June, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 16-06-2026 Ravi Kumar Ravi Kumar Digitally signed by Ravi Kumar Date: 2026.06.17 10:45:48 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr. CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, ‘SMC’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune

MANISH KISHAN TIRTHANI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 8(3), PUNE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments