SWAMINATH BABURAO PATIL,SOLAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3) SOLAPUR, SOLAPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal as unadmitted based on the incorrect premise that no return was filed. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to admit the appeal and decide it on merits, allowing the assessee to raise legal grounds.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) who dismissed the appeal as unadmitted. The CIT(A) had concluded that the assessee had not filed a return of income and thus not paid advance tax, leading to the dismissal. However, the assessment order indicated that the assessee had indeed filed a return of income.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) correctly dismissed the appeal as unadmitted when the assessee had filed a return of income. Whether the reopening and assessment proceedings were valid given procedural defects and alleged non-compliance with statutory notices.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 250,Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 292BB,Section 153C,Section 139(1),Section 249(4)(a),Section 249(4)(b),Section 151A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal713 citing340 CTR 865 · 2024 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
Before: MS.ASTHA CHANDRA & DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2014-15 dated 27.01.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 19.05.2023. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
ITA No.832/PUN/2025 [A] “1) Legal Ground that reopening is time barred as held by Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal
It may please be held that notice issued u/s 148 da
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026