NAZIM RIAZUDDIN SAIYED,TURQUOISE NYATI EMPIRE KHARADI PUNE vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 4(4), PMT BUILDING, SWARGATE, PUNE
Facts
The assessee, a retired army person, filed an appeal with a delay of 1909 days. The delay was due to a reasonable cause and was not intentional. The Ld.CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, considering the justice-oriented approach and relevant judgments. Since the Ld.CIT(A) had not decided the issue on merits, the case was remitted back for de novo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) should be condoned, and if so, the matter should be adjudicated on merits.
Sections Cited
143(1)(a), 36(1)(va)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.287/PUN/2026 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Nazim Riazuddin Saiyed, Vs. Assessing Officer, 301, Turquoise Nyati Empire, Ward-4(4), Pune Kharadi, Pune 411 014 Maharashtra PAN : AQZPS0676B Appellant Respondent
Assessee by : Shri Rajkumar Doshi 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. 2019-20 is directed against the order dated 31.12.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) arising out of Intimation Order dated 26.02.2020 passed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is a Retired Army person and income of Rs. 11,44,790/- declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2019-20 filed on 24.10.2019. Return processed u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act disallowing the deduction claimed by the asssessee for delayed payment of PF and ESIC but before the due date of filing the return of income u/s.36(1)(va) of the Act at Rs.37,90,380/-. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal but with a delay of 1909 days. Ld.CIT(A) relying on certain
ITA No.287/PUN/2026 Nazim Riazuddin Saiyed
judicial precedents has not condoned the delay and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal assailing the impugned order.
In the instant case, admittedly, the Intimation order was passed on 26.02.2020 and the assessee has filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) on 18.06.2025. There is delay of 1909 days in filing the appeal. I have perused the condonation application filed by the assessee before ld.CIT(A) giving the reasons which led to delay. On due consideration of the reasons, I find that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee was prevented from filing the appeal within the stipulated time. I find that delay in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) is not intentional and assessee would not have gained anything by filing the appeal with delay. However, taking justice oriented approach 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 condone the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A).
Since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues on merits, I deem it appropriate to remit back the issue to the file of ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall allow reasonable opportunity to the assessee to produce the details/evidences substantiating the deduction claimed by the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable
ITA No.287/PUN/2026 Nazim Riazuddin Saiyed
cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 17th day of March, 2026.
Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 17th March, 2026. Satish आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
// True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
