DASARAM TATU PATLE,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 221/NAG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 June 2025AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessment proceedings were carried out during the COVID-19 period, which significantly impacted the ability of individuals and businesses to comply with statutory requirements. The assessee's counsel demonstrated a plausible reason for non-compliance with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal observed that the issue before the lower authorities remained to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner. In the interest of substantial justice and for a just and proper decision, the Tribunal decided to remand the entire matter back to the Assessing Officer as an exceptional case. The learned CIT(A) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and the assessee was directed to file the relevant submissions/documents. The Tribunal clarified that no leniency would be granted in case of any subsequent default by the assessee. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Dasaram Tatu Patle, filed an appeal against the order dated 04/02/2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2016-17. The assessment proceedings were conducted during the COVID-19 period. The Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹25,50,000/- vide assessment order dated 17/03/2022, passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee failed to file relevant submissions/documents, seeking adjournment on two occasions, and made no further compliance. The learned CIT(A) affirmed the addition. The assessee contended that the non-compliance was due to the prevailing COVID-19 situation.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Tribunal should grant relief to the assessee by remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer, considering the assessment proceedings were conducted during the COVID-19 period and the assessee's inability to file submissions/documents. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that non-compliance with notices was due to the COVID-19 pandemic, during which the entire nation was on halt, providing a plausible reason for the failure to submit required documents. The assessee requested a lenient view. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the Revenue. However, it notes that the learned Departmental Representative (DR) did not object to the assessee's request for a lenient view and remand.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Jain
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 04/02/2025, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [for short, “learned CIT(A)”] for the assessment year 2016–17.

2.

Admittedly, the assessee, during the assessment proceedings, failed to file relevant submissions / documents as the assessment proceedings were carried out during the COVID–19 period, when the Dasaram Tatu Patle ITA no.221/Nag./2025 whole nation was on halt and, therefore, the learned counsel for the assessee has been able to demonstrate the plausible reason for non– compliance of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer.

3.

Coming to the impugned order, it is clear from Para–2, that the learned Commissioner, though, issued notices and the assessee, except seeking adjournment on two occasions, eventually the assessee made no compliance, which resulted into affirmation of the addition of ` 25,50,000, as made by the Assessing Officer vide assessment order dated 17/03/2022, passed under section 147 r/w section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"). Admittedly, the issue before both the authorities below remained to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner, the learned counsel for the assessee has requested for taking a lenient view, as also not objected by the learned D.R. Therefore, for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, this Court is inclined to remand the entire matter back to the tile of the Assessing Officer as an exceptional case, as the assessment proceedings were carried out by the Assessing Officer during the COVID–19 period. Suffice to say that the learned Commissioner shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee The assessee is also directed to file the relevant submissions/documents. It is clarified that, in case, subsequent default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

Dasaram Tatu Patle ITA no.221/Nag./2025

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms, as indicated above.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 27.06.2025

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →