SAI DISHA SAMAJIK VIKAS SANSHTA,AURANGABAD vs. EXEMPTION WARD, AURANGABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2502/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 February 2026AY 2018-19Bench: us. We observe that the assessee is a Cooperative Society and income of Rs.4,61,020/- declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. After making addition of Rs.1,90,09,827/- disallowing the deduction u/s.57 of the Act income assessed at Rs.1,94,70,847/-. Aggrieved with the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer assessee preferred appeal before Id.CIT(A) but with a delay of 448 days. Reasons for delay have been filed before ld.CIT(A). However, ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay an3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the 448-day delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), taking a justice-oriented approach and noting the COVID-19 pandemic as a reason. As the CIT(A) had not decided the issues on merits, the Tribunal remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, granting the assessee an opportunity to adduce evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a Cooperative Society, filed an appeal against an assessment order (u/s 144 r.w.s 144B) that made a substantial disallowance u/s 57, resulting in a higher assessed income. The appeal before the CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 448 days, which the CIT(A) did not condone, dismissing the appeal in limine. The assessment order was passed during the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak.

What were the issues?

Condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the CIT(A) and remanding the case for adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B,Section 57,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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 “B”, PUNE

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & MS.ASTHA CHANDRA

For Respondent: Shri Pramod Shahakar
Hearing: 10.02.2026Pronounced: 12.02.2026

आदेश / ORDER

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 01.09.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 25.05.2021 passed u/s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

When the case called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. With the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and available records, we proceed to adjudicate the appeal exparte qua the assessee.

3.

We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a Cooperative Society and income of Rs.4,61,020/- declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2018-19. After making addition of Rs.1,90,09,827/- disallowing the deduction u/s.57 of the Act income assessed at Rs.1,94,70,847/-. Aggrieved with the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but with a delay of 448 days. Reasons for delay have been filed before ld.CIT(A). However, ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine. On going through the reasons mentioned in the impugned order, we find that the assessment order was passed during covid-19 pandemic outbreak period prevailed across the country and also the other reasons clearly indicate that the delay was not deliberate and assessee has not gained anything from filing the appeal with delay.

4.

We therefore 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) condone the delay of 448 days in filing of the instant appeal before ld.CIT(A) and admit the appeal for adjudication.

5.

Since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues on merits, we deem it appropriate to remit back the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication.

Assessee is at liberty to adduce evidences/submissions in support of its case and ld.CIT(A) shall decide the issues in accordance with law as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and make satisfactory compliance to the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A). It should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 12th day of February, 2026.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →