VANDERLANDE INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) CIRCLE - 2, PUNE, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANTMEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIALMEMBER I T A. No.480/PUN/2026 (A.Y.2019-20) Vs Vanderlande Industries A.C.I.T.(International Private Limited.,Unit 609, 6th Taxation)Circle-2,Pune Floor,Tower 2, B.O Bhavan, Plot World Trade Centre, No.1, Sector NO.17, Kharadi, Pune Satara Rd. Pune-411014, Parvati, Maharashtra. Pune-411 009 Maharashtra. PAN.No.AACCV8546K (अपीलार्/Appellant) (प् र्/Respondent)

Assesseeby Shri.Alisagar Rampurwala,AR Revenue by Shri.Amit Bobde.CIT- DR

09.04.2026 सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing 22.04.2026 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of CIT(A) Pune-13 passed u/sec 201(1) and u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.The assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) dismissing the appeal on the ground of non maintainability. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee company has filed the return of income for Assessment Year 2019-20 on 28.11.2019. Subsequently, there was a proceeding u/Sec.201(1)

2 ITA. No. 480/PUN/2026 Vanderlande Industries P.Ltd. A.Y.2019-20 & 201(1A) of the Act by the Assessing Officer and notice was issued and the assessee’s has filed the submissions. Whereas in the financial year, under consideration the assessee is availing assistance of information technology and communication charged from its group Company Venderlande Industries B V pursuant to service agreement entered. The Assessing Officer has considered the facts and observed that the assessee was supposed to deduct TDS @10% on FTS charges as per DTAA agreement between India and Netherlands and there was a default. Finally the A.O has passed order treating the assessee in default u/sec201(1)&201(1A) of the Act and raised demand vide order dated 20.07.2021. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) found that the appeal filed by the assessee relate to financial year 2018-19 and as per the provisions of section 246A of the Act, the assessee should file the appeal against the order in relation to specific assessment year i.e A.Y.2019-20. Hence the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the technical ground that the assessee should file appeal in relation to A.Y.2019-20 and dismissed the appeal on non maintainability. Aggrieved with the CIT(A) order, the assessee has filed the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, theLd.AR submitted that CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground of non-maintainability by holding that the assessee has filed an appeal under financial year 2018-19 against the order passed for Assessment Year

3 ITA. No. 480/PUN/2026 Vanderlande Industries P.Ltd. A.Y.2019-20 2019-20. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was not able to file the appeal before the CIT(A)through PAN Login and instead used TAN based Login , were the portal does not permit the filling of appeal based on relevant Assessment Year but it permits filling reference to corresponding financial year i.e 2018-19. Further the CIT(A) has not provided reasonable opportunity of hearing and the assessee has a good case on merits and shall support with material evidences and substantiated the submissions with the factual paper book and prayed for an opportunity before the Lower authorities. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue envisaged by the Ld AR that the CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground of non-maintainability by holding that the assessee has filed an appeal under financial year 2018-19 against the order passed for Assessment Year 2019-20. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was not able to file the appeal before the CIT(A)through PAN Login and instead used TAN based Login, were the portal does not permit the filling of appeal based on relevant Assessment Year but it permits filling reference to corresponding financial year i.e 2018-19. Further the CIT(A) has not provided reasonable opportunity to explain with necessary clarifications and to make submissions. Whereas the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on 11.11.2025 much before the date of hearing communicating for furnishing the necessary submission i.e on 13.11.25. Therefore, we

4 ITA. No. 480/PUN/2026 Vanderlande Industries P.Ltd. A.Y.2019-20 considering the facts, circumstances and principle of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the disputed issue to the file the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for earlier disposal of appeal. We allow these grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22.04.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune Dated: 22th April, 2026 Ashwini Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant, 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, “B” Bench 6. Guard file. //True Copy//

BY ORDER, (Asstt.Registrar)ITAT, Pune