SUBHASH BABURAO AHER,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 3(1), NASHIK

ITA 240/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 March 2026AY 2017-18Bench: DR.MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal in limine due to a delay of 807 days without condoning it. The Tribunal, considering the peculiar facts and the 'reasonable cause' for the delay, condoned the delay. The Tribunal also noted that the assessee had furnished details of deductions claimed and paid due taxes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual working with Mahindra and Mahindra Limited, had income assessed under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following a survey action that revealed admissions of filing returns with bogus deductions. The Assessing Officer made additions to the income, which were contested by the assessee before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable, and whether the appeal should be remitted to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 133A,Section 270A,Section 80GG,Section 80C,Section 156

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: CA Abhilasha Pawar (Virtual)
For Respondent: Shri Dayanand Jawalikar
Hearing: 12.03.2026Pronounced: 17.03.2026

The captioned appeals at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Yrs. 2017-18 and 2018-19 are directed against the separate orders dated 12.12.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) arising out of respective Assessment Orders dated 02.03.2021 passed u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

I will first take up ITA No.240/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2017-18. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual working with Mahindra and Mahindra Limited. Income of Rs.2,83,720/- declared in the return e-filed on 23.07.2017. A survey action u/s.133A of the Act was conducted at the premises of Kishor Rajendra Patil wherein it was admitted by him

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →