KEDGAON GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,SOLAPUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, SOLAPUR
Facts
The assessee, a Cooperative society, failed to file its income tax return for AY 2015-16. The case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act due to information about cash/time deposits. The assessment was completed ex-parte at Rs. 52,53,459. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 391 days without condonation.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay of 391 days, relying on Apex Court judgments, finding the delay not intentional. The Tribunal remitted the appeal back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned to allow adjudication on merits, considering the principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
147, 142(1), 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 27.06.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) arising out of Assessment Order dated 30.01.2024 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
Brief facts are that the assessee is a Cooperative society and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its Members. Assessee society has not filed the return of income for A.Y. 2015-16 for the year under consideration. Based on
ITA No.1983/PUN/2025 Kedgaon Gramin Bigarsheti Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit
the information that assessee has made cash deposits/time deposits, case reopened u/s.147 of the Act. Statutory notices u/s.142(1) were served upon the assessee society, however there was no compliance on the part of the assessee and ld. Assessing Officer formed belief that there is escapement of income. Ld. Assessing Officer concluded the assessment proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act assessing the income at Rs.52,53,459/-. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but with a delay of 391 days. Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay. Further, there is no adjudication on merits of the case as well. Now the assessee is in appeal before us assailing the impugned order.
Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) were furnished and eventhough the said reasons were reproduced in the impugned order, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the asssessee, therefore, the issues raised in the instant appeal deserves restoration to the file ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on merits as the assessee has prima-facie case to substantiate the cash deposits/time deposits so made.
ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We on perusal of the orders of both the lower authorities find that orders were passed exparte
ITA No.1983/PUN/2025 Kedgaon Gramin Bigarsheti Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit
owing to non-compliance from the side of the assessee. We find that assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) with a delay of 391 days which has not been condoned by ld.CIT(A). We have carefully gone through the statement of facts filed before ld.CIT(A) and the reasons which led to delay in presenting the appeal before ld.CIT(A). We find that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from delaying the appeal. We therefore 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 391 days before this Tribunal.
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
ITA No.1983/PUN/2025 Kedgaon Gramin Bigarsheti Sahkari Patsanstha Maryadit
cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 13th day of March, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 13th March, 2026. Satish आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. 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,
// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
