DASTAGIR HAMID MUJAWAR,SANGLI vs. ITO WARD-2, SANGALI

ITA 1851/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 March 2026AY 2017-18Bench: DR.MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing a justice-oriented approach and reliance on Supreme Court judgments. The Tribunal remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 369 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to notices being sent to an incorrect email address. The assessee declared an income of Rs.3,54,970/-, but the Assessing Officer assessed income at Rs.1,00,23,470/- due to unexplained cash deposits.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the case should be adjudicated on merits by the CIT(A) after the initial dismissal due to non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 143(1),Section 142(1),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S Pathak
For Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath
Hearing: 23.02.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 14.05.2024 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) arising out of Assessment Order dated 13.12.2019 passed u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation as the assessee has filed the appeal before this Tribunal with a delay of 369 days. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the delay. Content of said affidavit reads as under :

2 Dastagir Hamid Mujawar

“I state that in the above case against the

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →