Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, engaged in wholesale trading of cement and building material, did not file an initial return due to income below the exemption limit but filed one later in response to a notice under Section 148. Additions were made by the AO leading to a best judgment assessment, and the CIT(A) dismissed the appeals as barred by limitation.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals before it, noting the reasons of non-communication by a previous consultant and the assessee's limited understanding of legal provisions. The issues were restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing appeals before the Tribunal and CIT(A) should be condoned, and whether the issues should be restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits after the initial dismissal.
Sections Cited
148, 250, 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “A” :: PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, AM:
This bunch of four appeals filed by the Assessee are directed against the separate orders of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961; for the assessment years referred above. Assessee has filed identical grounds for all these years. Since the issue involved is common, therefore, all these appeals were heard together and are being decided by this common order.
, 2427, 2435 & 2436/PUN/2024 [A] 1.1 Registry informed that there is a delay 233 days each in 2427 & 2435/PUN/2024 and delay of 293 days in ITA No.2436/PUN/2024. An Affidavit has been filed providing reasons for the delay in filing the appeals. On going through the same, we notice that the said delay was on account of common reason of non- communication to the assessee as the notices of hearing were sent on the Email-id of the previous consultant who did not informed the assessee and also the assessee is not much educated and does not know intrinsic provisions of law. We have carefully gone through the Affidavit and notice that on account of non-communication by consultant who was looking after the tax work of the assessee, the instant appeal could not be filed in time and considering it to be a reasonable cause, we condone the delay and admit all the four appeals for adjudication.
At the outset of hearing, ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that the appeals before the ld.CIT(A) were barred by limitation and the delay in filing appeal before the ld.CIT(A) were not condoned and he accordingly, dismissed the appeal by not admitting being barred by limitation. Prayer has been made before us. for providing one more opportunity.
, 2427, 2435 & 2436/PUN/2024 [A]
On the other hand, the ld.DR for the Revenue supported the impugned order.
We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We notice that the assessee is engaged in the business of wholesale trading of cement and building material. She did not file the return of income as her Total Income was below the basic exemption limitation. However, in reply to notice under section 148 of the Act, she has furnished the return of income. There were certain additions made by the Assessing Officer before whom assessee could not plead properly resulting into best judgments assessment. Considering all the series of facts, prima-facie the assessee in the instant case, does not deserve any relief. However, considering the grievances made in the Affidavit and in the larger interest of justice, we restore the issues on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. The assessee shall provide the correct and active email-id and contact details at the earliest o the Income Tax Portal. The ld.CIT(A) shall give reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, but in case the assessee do not respond to the communication sent on the updated email-id on more than two occasions, then the ld.CIT(A) shall proceed to decide in accordance , 2427, 2435 & 2436/PUN/2024 [A] with law as contemplated in section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to seek adjournment unless otherwise required. Accordingly, effective grounds of appeals by the Assessee raised in 2427, 2435 & 2436/PUN/2024 are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, all four the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 4th March, 2025.