P N ENTERPRISE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2410/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 January 2026AY 2023-24Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the 14-day delay in filing the appeal. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits, with instructions for the CIT(A) to provide a due hearing and for the assessee to participate promptly without causing further delays.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2023-24, which was dismissed solely due to a 14-day delay in filing. The assessee's counsel explained the delay was caused by the concerned Chartered Accountant being on maternity leave and requested a hearing on merits regarding several disallowances made by the AO that were not adjudicated.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal due to a delay in filing. 2. Whether the CIT(A) should have adjudicated the various disallowances made by the Assessing Officer on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 80G

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Ms. Hetvi Shah, CA on behalf of M.S. Chhajed, AR
Hearing: 21/01/2026Pronounced: 28/01/2026

Year : 2023-24 P. N. Enterprise The ITO बनाम/ E-501, 42 Park View Ward-4(2)(1) v/s. Nr. Kalhar Exotica Ahmedabad – 380 015 Science City, Sola Ahmedabad – 380 060 "थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAWFP 9588 L (अपीलाथ(/ Appellant) ()* यथ(/ Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Hetvi Shah, CA on behalf of M.S. Chhajed, AR Revenue by : Shri Rohit Aasudani, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 21/01/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 28/01/2026 आदेश/O R D E R

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 14/10/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24.

2.

The assessee, in this appeal, has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is against law, equity & justice.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing appeal for want of appeal filed belatedly. P N Enterprise vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2023-24 2

3.

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating disallowance made by the Ld. A.O. of Rs. 27,54,000/- i.e. remuneration & interest to partner.

4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating disallowance of depreciation made by the Ld. A.O. of Rs. 10,03,961/-.

5.

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating disallowance made U/S 80G of the Act by the Ld. A.O. of Rs.3,57,794/-.

6.

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating disallowance made by the Ld. A.O. of GST and late fee of Rs. 11,33,268/-.

7.

The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating disallowance made by the Ld. A.O. of Rs.2,06,39,198/- i.e., 30% of Labour charges amounting Rs.6,87,97,329/-.

8.

The appellant Craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal.”

3. At the outset, Ms. Hetvi Shah, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has brought our attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to submit that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee being barred by limitation of 14 days only.

4.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the concerned Chartered Accountant (C.A.), who was entrusted with the matter had gone on maternity leave because of which there was a small delay of 14 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel has submitted that assessee has a fair case on merits and that in the interests of justice, the assessee may be given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A).

5. After considering the rival submissions, in our view, the interests of justice will be well-served if the assessee be given an opportunity to present its case before the Ld. CIT(A). The delay in filing the appeal before the P N Enterprise vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2023-24 3 Ld.CIT(A) is also hereby condoned. The matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh on merits by way of a speaking order, irrespective of the fact that there was a delay in filing the appeal before him, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say that the assessee will promptly participate before the Ld.CIT(A) and will not contribute for any delay in disposal of this appeal by the Ld.CIT(A).

More judgments on Section 80G

All 6,482 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80G →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →