DAULAT SAVALA NARUTE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 5(20, PUNE

That I am not well versed with the Tax Provisions and e- assessment proceedings.

That due to lack of knowledge and as I am not well versed with the e-assessment proceedings, I could not submit the reply. The non- compliance was not intentional.

That when abovementioned order was received, I approached to a Tax Consultant. I assumed that he is handling the case, but he never revert it to me. This causes the delay in filling of appeal.

That there is delay of 27 days in filing of appeal.

That the appeal is filed on a meritorious matter and deserves to be addressed on the grounds of merits. Non allowance of the appeal would cause unnecessary hardship to the Appellant when actually the remedy is available in the law itself.

That the Appeal is filed on legal grounds.

That there is no mala fide intention in late filing the Appeal.

On perusing the averments made in the affidavit, we are satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. We note that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of 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 27 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication.

After carefully hearing ld. Counsel for the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative, we observe that due to non appearance of the assessee before ld.CIT(A), appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in limine by ld.CIT(A) referring to Daulat Savala Narute

We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and the reassessment proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act has been carried out for A.Y. 2015-16 and addition of Rs.51,19,500/- has been made as against the returned income of Rs.2,29,970/-. Income assessed at Rs.53,49,470/-. Admittedly, the assessee has not availed the opportunities granted by ld. AO resulting into passing of Best Judgment Assessment and even in the appeal filed before ld.CIT(A) assessee has raised only one ground that the assessee earns only Agricultural income which is exempt from tax and all cash deposits are from Agricultural income. However, assessee failed to appear before ld.CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine. Before us, assessee has raised various legal issues challenging the legality of the reassessment proceedings. We have gone through the legal issues and in view of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. Daulat Savala Narute

The issue of Tribunal’s power to adjudicate the ground raised before it in second appeal which did not pass through first appeal came for consideration before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Divine Infracon Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT’ [2025, 171 taxmann.com 92 (Del)], wherein their Hon’ble पुणे / Pune;
दनांक / Dated : 28th November, 2025. Satish

अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune.

गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,