SUNIL DHANRAJ SHIVNANI,PUNE vs. ITO CIRCLE2 , PUNE

Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sunil Dhanraj Shivnani, V The Dy. Commissioner of Shop No.1/2, Ishana 4, s. Income, Circle-3, Pune. Paud Road,, Opp. Lohia- Jain IT Park, Kothrud, Pune- 411038. PAN: ACEPS2462C Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Vinod Pawar – Addl. CIT(DR) Date of hearing 06/05/2025 Date of pronouncement 13/05/2025 आदेश/ ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax, (A) – NFAC Delhi, is not justified in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of non- availability appeal memorandum with statement of facts and grounds of appeal.

The said memorandum of appeal in form 35 with statement of fact and grounds of appeal is available on the IT Portal. The appeal before NFAC - CIT(A) was the first appeal and NOT arising from set aside order of ITAT/HC/SC. The appeal before CIT(A) be restored by setting aside his order dt 10/01/2025.

2. On the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee be awarded cost of Rs 10,000/- being the filing fees for the present appeal. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, omit or substitute any of the grounds at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

2. None appeared for the assessee no adjournment was filed.

3. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the record. It is observed that Ld. CIT(A)[NFAC] has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A)[NFAC]’s order is reproduced hereunder :- Appeal No. NFAC/2012-13/10299130 Status/Deductor Category Individual Residential Status Resident Nature of Business Others Section under which the order 143(3) appealed against was passed Date of Order under which the 21/03/2016 order appealed against was passed Income/Loss Assessed (in Rs.) 0 Tax/Penalty/Fine/Interest 2256890 Demanded (in Rs.) Present for the appellant Not Applicable Present for the Department Not Applicable In this case, the appeal was pending in the ITBA worklist and the case was accordingly taken up for hearing. However, the basic appeal document like form 35 with all the relevant annexures was not available in the system. In view of this, the assessee was requested to upload the relevant appeal documents. However, the assessee did not produce/upload the said form along with enclosures despite providing adequate opportunities. In view of this, appeal is treated as non- maintainable and dismissed.

4. Thus, it can be seen that Ld. CIT(A)[NFAC] has not bothered to get copy of Form 35 from his predecessor. This appeal was filed on 25.04.2016 when the faceless appeal system was not existing. Therefore, assessee has rightly filed Form 35 with the respective Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal). It was duty of the Ld. CIT(A)[NFAC] to obtain all the relevant documents from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) concerned. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order of Ld. CIT(A)[NFAC] to Ld. CIT(A)[NFAC] for de novo adjudication. Ld. CIT(A)[NFAC] shall provide opportunity to the assessee and assessee shall file all necessary documents. Accordingly, ground no.1 is allowed for statistical purposes.