PAVAN RAGHUMAL WADHWANI,PUNE vs. CIT NFAC, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.316/PUN/2025
िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2015-16

Pavan Raghumal Wadhwani,
Bungalow No.30B, Goodwill
Co-op. Housing Society, Next to Sarjaa Hotel, ITI Road,
Aundh, Pune- 411007. PAN : AAHPW5645C
Vs. Assessment Unit, Income
Tax Department, NFAC,
Delhi.

Appellant

Respondent

आदेश / ORDER

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 21.11.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. There is delay in filing the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the condonation application duly supported by an affidavit that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not filing the present appeal in time. Ld. DR
Assessee by :
Shri Shubam S. Pednekar
Revenue by :
Shri Milind Debaje

Date of hearing
:
23.04.2025
Date of pronouncement
:
29.05.2025
2
raised no serious objection to condone the delay therefore, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not furnished his return of income for the period under consideration. On the basis of information collected/received by the Assessing Officer from AIR data it was found that the assessee has sold immovable property for Rs.2,45,58,000/- and has made cash deposit of Rs.3,13,04,860/- in his savings bank account.
However, assessee has not offered this income for taxation as no return of income was filed by the assessee. Accordingly, reassessment proceedings were initiated u/s 147 of the IT Act after obtaining prior approval from the competent authority and notice u/s 148 of the IT Act and notice u/s 142(1) respectively were issued to the assessee, however, assessee did not furnish any compliance before the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the IT Act by determining total income at Rs.4,27,34,500/- as against no return filed by the assessee. The above assessed income include addition of Rs.2,45,58,000/- under the head “short term
3
capital gains” and also addition of Rs.1,81,76,500/- regarding unexplained money determined u/s 69 of the IT Act.
4. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee without condoning the delay of 64 days in filing appeal before him. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
5. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified.
Ld. AR submitted before us that the assessee was engaged in the marriage of his family member and due to this reason could not see the notices of hearing issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. However, it was also submitted by Ld. Counsel of the assessee that Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC issued back to back three notices in a short span of 17 days and since there was marriage function in the family of assessee on 21, 22 and 23 November 2024, the assessee could not pay attention to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.
Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before us that one more opportunity may kindly be provided to the assessee so that he can support the grounds of appeal and substantiate his case before Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC.
4
6. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same.
7. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without admitting the same since it was filed belatedly i.e. with a delay of 64 days. We also find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC have issued back to back three notices of hearing within a short span of 17 days. It was the contention of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that due to marriage function in the family of the assessee during 21, 22, and 23
November, 2024, the assessee was awfully busy and cannot contact and ask his counsel to take the adjournment before Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld.
CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law after condoning the delay and also after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby
5
directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce relevant documents/evidences/explanations in support of grounds of appeal without taking adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are partly allowed.
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 29th day of May, 2025. (R. K. PANDA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER

पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 29th May, 2025. Sujeet
आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant.
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent.
3. The Pr. CIT concerned.
4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune.

////
Senior Private Secretary

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.