SURESH RAMKRISHNA BHATMULE,,THANE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (1),, NASHIK

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे �यायपीठ “एक-सद�य मामला” पुणे म� IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE �ी डी. क�णाकरा राव, लेखा सद�य के सम� BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.835/PUN/2019 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Suresh Ramkrishna Bhatmule, 303-304, C-11, Mandar, Opp. Vasant Vihar School, Next to Amrapali Arcade, Vasant Vihar, Thane-400610. अपीलाथ�/Appellant PAN : AAUPB8176G …. Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), …. ��थ� / Respondent Nashik. अपीलाथ� क� ओर से / Appellant by : Smt. Deepa Khare ��थ� की ओर से / Respondent by : Shri Sachin Y. Jawale सुनवाई क� तारीख / घोषणा क� तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18.12.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 18.12.2019 आदेश / ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-1, Nashik dated 10.12.2018 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. Preliminary Issue - Condonation of Delay 2. Before me, at the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeal could not be filed in time and the said appeal is now filed with the delay of 85 days. In this regard, ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an affidavit stating the reasons for non-filing the appeal of the assessee in time. For the sake of completeness, the relevant para of the said affidavit is extracted hereunder :-

-2- ITA No.835/PUN/2019 “1. I am a senior citizen. The appellate order passed by the CIT(A) - 1, Nashik for A.Y.2014 - 15 was received by my Authorised Representative, CA Vinay Bele around 04.01.2019. Thus, the due date for filing the appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was 05.03.2019. The appeal was dispatched through courier from Nashik on 28.05.2019 and the same shall be filed at Pune around 31.05.2019. Accordingly, there is a delay of 87 days in filing the present appeal. I hereby state that the above delay in filing the above appeal was on account of reasonable cause. 2. I hereby state that I am a senior citizen and I am completely dependent on my C.A./ A.R. for the income tax appeal work. I wish to state that around the month of December 2018, my health was deteriorating due to old age and hence, I moved to my son at Thane. I hereby state that my A.R., CA Bele received the appellate order passed by CIT(A), Nashik around first week of January 2019, however, he was not able to contact me in view of my ill health and in view of the fact that I had shifted to Thane from Nashik. I wish to state that in the third week of May 2019, I came back to Nashik. On returning, I found that an order giving effect to CIT(A) order was received by post at my residential address at Nashik. Accordingly, I contacted my C.A. with regards to the said order. I hereby state that at that point of time, the C.A. informed me that the appellate order for A.Y.2014 - 15 was passed by the CIT(A) four months back. On becoming aware of the above fact, the appeal was filed on 31.05.2019 i.e. within 2 weeks. 3. I hereby state that due to the above facts, there was a delay of around 87 days in filing the appeal against the CIT(A) order for.A.Y.2014 – 15.” 3. Considering the above reasons given by the assessee in the affidavit i.e. old age of the assessee, medical illness of the assessee, problems related to shifting of residence one address to another etc, I find it is a fit case for condoning the delay of 85 days. After condoning the delay, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. Before me, at the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this is a case where the assessee is a retired employee and cash deposits to the tune of Rs.21,74,000/- deposited to the bank account of the assessee maintained with State Bank of India. Notwithstanding the fact relating to the cash deposits and the debatable explanation on sources of it thereof, ld. Counsel submitted that he has no objection if the claim of deduction u/s 54F of the Act is granted after considering the said earned money

-3- ITA No.835/PUN/2019 amounting to Rs.10,87,000/- (50% of Rs.21,74,000/-). Referring to the said claim of deduction, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the said issue was not formally raised before the CIT(A). Thus, the CIT(A) did not have an opportunity to adjudicate this issue, although the similar claim is available before the Assessing Officer by way of claiming through filing of revised computation of income. For filing the revised Return of Income, the assessee did not have time to revised the original return before the Assessing Officer in accordance with judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Goetzee (India) Ltd. vs. CIT, 204 CTR 182 (SC). Bringing my attention to ground no.2 and 3 of the appeal raised before me, ld. Counsel mentioned that such judgment is in favour of adjudication of such legal issue raised for the first time before the Appellate Authority such as CIT(A) and ITAT. 5. On hearing both the sides on this alternative grounds, I am of the opinion that the said grounds should be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to hear this legal issue in considering the said judgement of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Goetzee (India) Ltd. (supra). The CIT(A) shall note that Assessing Officer was sized up with the claim of deduction u/s 54F of the Act. The CIT(A) is also directed to adjudicate the issue once again and pass a speaking order on this alternative grounds/arguments after granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with set principles of natural justice. With these directions, the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.

-4- ITA No.835/PUN/2019 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 18th day of December, 2019. Sd/- (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) लेखा सद� / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक Dated : 18th December, 2019. Sujeet आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order is forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant; 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent; 2. 3. The CIT(A)-1, Nashik; 4. The Pr. CIT-1, Nashik; िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे “एक-सद�य मामला” / 5. DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�यािपत �ित //True Copy// Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune