BALWANT VASANTRAV JADHAV,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1101/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 November 2025AY 2015-16Bench: DR. MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal, deeming it unintentional, and admitted it for adjudication. As the ld. CIT(A) had not decided the appeal on merits, the ITAT remitted the matter back to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, emphasizing the need for a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

For A.Y. 2015-16, the assessee's assessment was completed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with certain additions. The assessee filed an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) challenging these additions, but it was instituted with a delay of 148 days and subsequently dismissed in limine by the ld. CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) should be condoned and whether the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine without considering its merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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 Respondent: Shri Udol Raj Singh
Hearing: 10.11.2025Pronounced: 27.11.2025

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 26.02.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre emanating out of Assessment Order dated 22.03.2023 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

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 and available material records.

3.

We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record placed before us. We notice that the assessee is an individual and assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 has been completed on 22.03.2023 u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act wherein certain additions were made. Assessee challenged these additions in the appeal filed before ld.CIT(A) but the same was instituted on 16.09.2023, i.e. with a delay of 148 days. Though the assessee mentioned the reasons for delay in Form No.35, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine. The reasons mentioned in Form No.35 are as follows :

“A delay of 147 days has occurred in filing the appeal. The appellant assessee is 12th pass only and has little knowledge about the income tax laws and rules. He is not computer savvy also. He has no idea of about assessment order and various penalty proceedings initiation. A letter dated 17/08/2023 issued by the department was received by him then only he approached to Ulhas Borse & Co. of Nashik where he was explained about the delay in filing appeal and advised to file appeal against the assessment order. The delay has occurred on which the appellant had no control. Therefore, your honour is humbly and respectfully prayed to kindly condone the delay.”

4.

On perusal of the above reasons, we observe that the delay in filing of the appeal before ld.CIT(A) is not intentional and assessee would not have gained anything by 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 in filing of the appeal before ld.CIT(A) and admit the appeals for adjudication.

5.

However, since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merits, we deem it appropriate to remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 27th day of November, 2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →