Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal against an assessment order, which was a best judgment assessment under Section 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was dismissed by the CIT(A) for being barred by limitation. The assessee claimed inability to appear before the Assessing Officer due to being in a rural area and lack of technological awareness.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) by considering the assessee's reasons as a 'reasonable cause' and relying on Apex Court judgments. The Tribunal also noted that the CIT(A) had not decided the issues on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was to be condoned, and whether the matter should be remitted to the AO for de novo adjudication on merits.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
Assessee by : Shri Anup Shaha Revenue by : Shri Dayanand Jawalikar Date of hearing : 12.03.2026 Date of pronouncement : 17.03.2026 आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2016-17 is directed against the order dated 01.12.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) arising out of Assessment Order dated 21.03.2022 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal being barred by limitation and also assessee could not appear before the ld. Assessing Officer resulting into Best Judgment assessment. Only prayer is made to afford one more opportunity to go before ld.Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A) but raised no objection if the matter is restored to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.
I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is an individual and assessment for A.Y. 2016-17 has been framed as Best Judgment u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act and addition of Rs.9,64,000/- has been made and assessed the income at the very same amount. Even though the assessee challenged the addition before ld.CIT(A) but there was delay in filing the appeal which has not been condoned by ld.CIT(A). Assessee has mentioned the reason giving rise to the delay in the form of Affidavit placed on record and the delay is mainly on account of inability of the assessee to use email and lack of awareness of other mode of technology as he resides in rural part of Kondan region. Considering the ‘reasonable cause’ and placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) I hereby condone the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A).
So far as merits of the case are concerned, it is evident that ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues on merits. I therefore considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assesee and in the interest of justice being fair to both the parties deem it appropriate to remit back the issues to the file of ld. JAO for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.JAO in the set aside proceedings shall allow reasonable opportunity to the assessee to produce the details/evidences substantiating the cash deposits.
Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective ground No.1 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. For remaining grounds, in absence of any averments from ld. Authorised Representative, the remaining grounds are dismissed as ‘not pressed’.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 17th day of March, 2026.