RAMESH KONDIBA PATIL,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2), PUNE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE
BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2065/PUN/2025
Assessment Year 2016-17
Ramesh Kondiba Patil,
Flat No.436, Raj Tower,
D Wing, Santosh Nagar,
Pune 411 046
Maharashtra
PAN : AILPP5863F
Vs.
Income Tax Officer,
Ward-5(2), Pune
Appellant
Respondent
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2016-17 is directed against the order dated
19.06.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre
(NFAC), Delhi emanating out of Assessment Order dated
16.03.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the income Tax Act,
1961. 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by ld.CIT(A) which resulted into dismissal of the assessee’s appeal and ld.CIT(A) without dealing with merits of the case affirmed the action of the ld. Assessing Officer. He therefore prayed that one more opportunity may please be granted by remitting the Assessee by :
Shri Pramod S. Shingte
Respondent by :
Shri Vinod Pawar
(Virtual)
Date of hearing
:
28.10.2025
Date of pronouncement
:
12.11.2025
Ramesh Kondiba Patil
2
issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication.
On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative supported the order of ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessee is an individual and assessment for A.Y. 2016-17 dated 16.03.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act wherein couple of additions made at Rs.1,38,21,275 and Rs.12,00,000/- assessing the income at Rs.1,50,21,275/-.
Assessee challenged these additions before ld.CIT(A) but then failed to respond to the notices issued on various dates referred in para
5 of the impugned order. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed for granting one more opportunity as the assessee could not respond to the notices for the reasons beyond control of the assessee.
Under the given facts and circumstances, considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and adopting justice oriented approach, we deem it to afford one more opportunity to the assessee. 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 in the set aside proceedings ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on Ramesh Kondiba Patil
3
merits even in an exparte order. 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. 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 12th day of November, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 12th November, 2025. Satish
आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ / The Assessee. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune.
गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
//// Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.