LAXMIKANT NANDKISHOR TOSHNIWAL,LATUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, LATUR

ITA 1853/PUN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 January 2026AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)6 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A). It directed the CIT(A) to condone the delay, considering the reasons provided (mistake by office staff and CA's affidavit), and to decide the appeal on merits as per facts and law. The assessee was also directed to cooperate by responding to notices and producing all relevant documents without seeking adjournments.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual, filed a return declaring Rs.3,51,660/-. Based on information of unreported suspicious transactions amounting to Rs.38,45,40,711/-, reassessment proceedings u/s 147 were initiated. Due to non-response to notices, the AO completed assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144/144B, making additions under section 68 for Rs.10,53,000/- and Rs.38,45,40,711/-, and determining total income at Rs.38,59,45,371/-. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to a delay of 511 days in filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal; challenges to the initiation of reassessment proceedings; and validity of additions made under section 68 of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 144,Section 144B,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Shubham N. Rathi (Virtual)
For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Hearing: 05.01.2026Pronounced: 30.01.2026

PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 11.07.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. NON-ACCEPTANCE OF CONDONATION OF DELAY

1.

1 The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) ["the Ld. CIT(A)] has erred in not condoning the delay in filing of the appeal without properly considering the cause for delay.

2

1.2.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in not deciding the issue on merits.

1.

3 The appellant prays that the delay before the CIT(A) be condoned and appea

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 →