DASTAGIR HAMID MUJAWAR,SANGLI vs. ITO WARD-2, SANGALI
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.
Held
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.
Key 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.
Sections Cited
144, 143(1), 142(1), 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
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’).
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 Appellate order was passed on 14.05.2024. Ordinarily the appeal should have been preferred by us to the ITAT against the said order within 60 days namely by 13.07.2024. The date for filing the present appeal is 30.06.2025. I state that there is thus a delay of 352 days. I solemnly state that the delay was caused due to the fact that the order was served on the email address guravearthhmovers@gmail.com which does not belong to me. My email address is dastgirmujawar805@gmail.com thus, I was unaware of the order passed and subsequent notices issued by the income tax department. It is only when I proceeded to file my return of income for the AY 2025-26, I got to know that the order was passed. And thus, I was unable to file the appeal within the prescribed time. Thus, there is a delay of 352 days in filing the appeal. I humbly submit that the delay in filing the appeal was unintentional and the assessee has not been benefitted by causing such delay. It is humbly prayed before your Honour's that the delay of 352 days delay in filing the appeal my kindly be condoned in the principle of natural justice. I state that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The assessee shall remain forever grateful for the act of kindness.”
Considering above averments made by the assessee and also adopting justice oriented approach, we find that the delay is not intentional and placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 369 days before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.
Brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and income of Rs.3,54,970/- declared in the return e-filed on 01.08.2017. Case selected for Limited Scrutiny under CASS for verification of “Large Cash deposited compared to returned income”. Statutory notices u/s.143(1)/142(1) were served
3 Dastagir Hamid Mujawar
upon the assessee and there was no compliance on the part of the assessee resulting into completion of assessment u/s.144 of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer observed that assessee has deposited Rs.96,68,500/- in his current account maintained with Indian Bank, Sangli Branch. In the absence of any submission from the side of assessee, Ld. Assessing Officer treated the said sum as unexplained cash credits and made addition u/s.68 of the Act. Income assessed at Rs.1,00,23,470/- as against the returned income of Rs.3,54,970/-.
Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but failed to appear on the given dates of hearing and ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal contending that notices of hearing were sent on email address which was not used by the assesee and hence there was non compliance. Assessee vide ground No.1 prayed for restoration of issues to the file of ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us.
Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assesee submitted that assessee was unable to comply with the notices sent by the Department as they have been sent on email id which was not used by the assessee. He further submitted that assessee has prima-facie case to substantiate the allegation of cash deposits made by the ld. Assessing Officer. He further submitted that both the orders of the authorities are exparte and there is no adjudication on merits and therefore a prayer is made for 4 Dastagir Hamid Mujawar
setting aside the impugned order and affording an opportunity to go before ld.CIT(A) for denovo proceedings.
On the other hand, ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities.
Considering the totality of facts and circumstances and the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, we deem it appropriate to grant an opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A). In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues raised in the instant appeal are remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and make satisfactory compliance to the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A) and should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 13th day of March, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 13th March, 2026. Satish
5 Dastagir Hamid Mujawar
आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
////
