Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, an individual, failed to file a return for AY 2018-19. The case was selected for scrutiny based on information about the sale of an immovable property. The assessee did not participate in assessment proceedings, leading to an addition of Rs. 1,02,50,000/-. The assessee stated the property was jointly owned and the sale agreement was entered earlier, but the final sale deed was executed in FY 2018-19.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), finding it not intentional. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT(A) should have dealt with the issues on merits instead of dismissing the appeal on limitation. Consequently, the issues were remitted back to the Assessing Officer for verification and decision.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) should be condoned. Whether the matter should be decided on merits or dismissed on limitation. Whether the sale of immovable property was correctly treated for the AY 2018-19.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144, 148A(b), 148A(d), 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE
Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
I.T.A.No.2378/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year 2018-2019) Parag Dattatray Inamdar, ITO, PMT Building, Shankar Bungalow No.23, Lane Sheth Road, Pune No.3, Navketan CHS, Mayur Colony, Kothrud, Pune-411038 vs. PAN : AAEPI 8292 E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Shri Umesh Phade, Addl.CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 26.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28.11.2025 ORDER PER : MANISH BORAD, AM
This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/ Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [“CIT(A)”], dated 11/07/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”), which is arising out of assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 20/03/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19.
2 ITA.No.2378/PUN./2025 (Parag Dattatray Inamdar) 2. When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. We, therefore, proceed to adjudicate the appeal with the assistance of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and the documents available on record.
Registry has informed that there is a delay of 14 days in filing the instant appeal. Application for condonation of delay along with affidavit has been filed. On perusal of the affidavit we find that the main reason for delay is on account of Tax Consultant, to was approached by the assessee for fling of the appeal, however, he failed to do the needful within the prescribed time limit and filed the appeal before this Tribunal with delay of 14 days. We find that the delay is not intentional and therefore adopting a justice oriented approach and also taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), hereby condone the delay of 14 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.
With the assistance of Ld. DR and available on records, we notice that Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal being barred by limitation. Reasons for delay in filing before the Ld.CIT(A) are mentioned in para 2.7 of the impugned
3 ITA.No.2378/PUN./2025 (Parag Dattatray Inamdar) order. On perusal of the said reasons, we notice that assessee was engaged in the business of running restaurant and also took loans from various parties. Due to closure of business and tremendous pressure to repay the loans, assessee was not in good mental condition and also suffered from many diseases including high sugar level. On going through these reasons, we find that the delay in filing appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from delaying the appeal. Ld.CIT(A) ought to have condoned this delay and should have dealt with the issues on merits. We, however, considering the prayer made by the assessee in the grounds of appeal and also on perusal of the records, deem it appropriate to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A).
5. So far as merits of the case are concerned, the assessee is an individual, did not file return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. Based on the information about sale of immovable property, the case selected for scrutiny by issuance of valid notice u/s. 148A(b), 148A(d) & 148 of the Act. Assessee failed to participate in the assessment proceedings, as a result of which, Ld.AO made the addition for variation in respect of sale of immovable property at Rs. 1,02,50,000/- and assessed the income at the same amount. We observe that assessee in Form No. 35 referred the reasons for delay in filing of the 4 ITA.No.2378/PUN./2025 (Parag Dattatray Inamdar) appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). In the statement of facts, he stated that immovable property in question is jointly owned by him and his mother Smt. Alka Dattatray Inamdar and an agreement to sale was entered into on 02/01/2018, but on that date, neither the assessee received full amount of sale consideration nor possession was handed-over to the purchaser. However, this transaction was shown on the INSIGHT portal. He further submitted that final sale deed was executed on 04/06/2018 and the transactions took-place during F.Y. 2018-19 which has been duly reflected by the assessee and his mother in their returns of income for A.Y. 2019-20.
6. Considering these facts and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit back the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO), who shall verify the submissions made by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A) about the sale of immovable property and offering of capital gain to tax in A.Y. 2019-20. After necessary verification, Ld.JAO can decide in accordance with law. Needless to mention that Ld. JAO shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee for submitting further details, if any. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournments unless
5 ITA.No.2378/PUN./2025 (Parag Dattatray Inamdar) required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.11.2025.