SADASHIV DATTATRAY TAPKIR,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 13(4), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3113/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 April 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) due to the assessee's age and unfamiliarity with tax procedures. Since the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine without deciding on merits, the case was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a senior citizen and agriculturist, failed to file a return of income for AY 2015-16. Reassessment proceedings were initiated due to a significant sale of immovable property. The assessee faced delays in filing appeals before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

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

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Joshi
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh Budruk
Hearing: 09.04.2026Pronounced: 29.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 3113/PUN/2025 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Sadashiv Dattatray Tapkir Vs. ITO – Ward 13(4) Flat No. 210, Aksha Vasant Aayakar Sadan, Bodhi Park, Moshi Alandi Road, Tower, 548/2B, Moshi B.O, Moshi Pune - Salisbury Park, 412105 Gultenkdi, Pune, PAN: AVWPT4359G Maharashtra 411037. Appellant Respondent

: Assessee by Shri Narendra Joshi : Revenue by Shri Ganesh Budruk, Add. CIT : Date of hearing 09.04.2026 Date of pronouncement : 29.04.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, AM:

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee directed against the order Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dated 01.08.2025 pertain to A.Y 2015-16 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) dated 29.05.2013.

2.

Registry has informed that the delay of 47 days Application for condonation of delay along with affidavit is placed on record. Main reason for delay is that the assessee is a senior citizen, primarily engaged

ITA No.3113/PUN/2025 Sadashiv Datttray Tapkir

in agricultural activities and not familiar with new Income tax portal, electronic communication system or related legal procedures. Considering it to be reasonable cause and further observing that delay is not intentional and assessee has not gained from the said delay and therefore taking a justice oriented approach and placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisiiton, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. Reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), hereby condone the delay of 47 days and admit the appeal for adjudication.

3.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that there was a delay of 207 days in filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A) and the same has not been condoned. He therefore prayed to condone the delay in filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A) and restore the issues raised on merits for necessary adjudication.

4.

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

5.

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We observe that assessee is an individual who did not file the return of income for A.Y 2015-16. Based on the information of the assessee having entered into financial transactions of Rs. 3,57,15,613/- regarding sale of immovable

ITA No.3113/PUN/2025 Sadashiv Datttray Tapkir

property, notice u/s 148 of the Act served upon the assessee for carrying out the reassessment proceedings. The assessee did not avail the opportunities granted. Ld. DR based on the information that the assessee is 1/3rd owner of the immovable property computed the short term capital gain income at Rs. 1,19,05,204/- and assessed income for the very same amount. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) but there is a delay of 207 days. The assessee mentioned the reasons for delay stating them to be reasonable cause but could not convince the ld. CIT(A) who has dismissed the appeal in limine being barred of limitation.

6.

Before us assessee has furnished affidavit providing the details of the transaction along with the reasons for non appearance before ld. AO and also reasons for delay in filing the appeal before ld. CIT(A). On due consideration of these details and also observe that the assessee is a senior citizen and an agriculturist and was not aware about the income tax appellate proceedings and had to search for a tax consultant to look after this matter the delay was occurred. Considering it to be reasonable cause and delay being unintentional, we hereby condone the delay in filing of appeal before ld. CIT(A).

7.

So far as merits of the case are concerned, we find that ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issues raised in the instant appeal on merits, therefore considering the

ITA No.3113/PUN/2025 Sadashiv Datttray Tapkir prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the sides, we deem it proper to restore the issues on merits back to the file ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the issue, the issues raised in the instant appeal are being remitted to the file of ld. CIT(A). Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to update email and contact details on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Finding of the Ld.CIT(A) is set aside and Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

8.

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

Order pronounced on this 29th day of April, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; िदनांक / Dated : 29 April, 2026.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →