ANANDA GORAKHANATH PAWAR,SATARA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 3, SATARA, SATARA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause (illness) from filing the appeal within the prescribed time. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)/NFAC's order and remanded the matter back, directing the CIT(A)/NFAC to condone the delay and decide the appeal on its merits after providing the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an individual, did not file an income tax return for AY 2018-19. Based on information of cash withdrawals and deposits, the Assessing Officer completed reassessment under Section 147 r.w.s. Section 144C(3), determining income at Rs. 26,14,041/-. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A)/NFAC, but the appeal was dismissed in limine due to a 26-day delay, despite the assessee citing illness and submitting a medical certificate.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine by refusing to condone a 26-day delay, and whether the assessment order passed under Section 147 was procedurally irregular regarding notices and faceless assessment norms.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 144,Section 148,Section 148A(d),Section 151A,Section 148A(b),Section 144B,Section 142(1),Section 143(2),Section 144C,Section 148(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.06.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19. 2. The appellant has filed the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The learned CIT has erred both on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the appellant by refusing to condone the delay of 26 days on grounds of period of limitation, notwithstanding the fact that appellant has submitted the application and explained the reasons for delay.
2
The learned CIT has erred both in facts and in law in dismissing the appeal without giving an opportunity and notice to Show cause as to why delay to filing the Appeal should not be condoned espec
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 →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
