SHRI BHUSHAN BHAGWANT SHINDE,PUNE vs. ITO-(IT) WRD-14(3), PUNE, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's submission regarding the incorrect email ID and the inability to represent the case before lower authorities. Considering the additional evidence provided, the Tribunal decided to remand the matter for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee declared substantial agricultural income but failed to provide evidence to the AO. The lower appellate authority dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. The assessee claimed they were unaware of notices due to an incorrect email ID being uploaded.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal should be dismissed for non-prosecution when the assessee claims lack of awareness of notices due to technical error, and whether to allow remand for substantiating agricultural income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 14.02.2024 for the assessment year 2020-21.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual who filed the Return of Income for the A.Y. 2020-21 on 22.12.2020 declaring total income of Rs.2,49,850/- and Agricultural income of Rs.57,24,588/-. The case was selected for Scrutiny under CASS. Statutory notices were issued to the appellant. The assessee was called upon to upload the evidences as the assessee had shown huge Agricultural income in the Return of Income filed. The assessee had not made any compliance to the notices. In the absence of any material evidence for the agricultural activities and relevant expenses, the AO vide order dated 09.09.2022 completed the assessment u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act bringing to tax the gross Agricultural Income amounting to Rs.73,16,880/- treating the same as “Income from other Sources.
Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A)/NFAC who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal in limine for non- prosecution.
Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal.
The ld. AR submits that while filing the appeal by the Tax Consultant, inadvertently the e-mail ID pertaining to the earlier Tax Consultant was uploaded and therefore the assessee was unaware of the notices issued by the Department. It is further submitted that the assessee did not receive any communication whatsoever through e-mail or Post. Therefore, the assessee could not pursue/represent the matter before the lower authorities. It is stated that given an opportunity the assessee is able to substantiate the claim of Agricultural Income made. In the circumstances, it is therefore prayed for remanding the matter back to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC.
On the other hand, the ld. DR placing reliance on the orders of the lower authorities submits for confirmation of the same.
We heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. It is an admitted position that the assessee could not represent the matter before the lower authorities to substantiate the Agricultural income shown by the assessee. We have gone through the averments made in the affidavit filed by the assessee that inadvertently the e-mail ID of the erstwhile Tax Consultant was uploaded and the assessee was unaware of the notices issued by the Department.
Also in view of the fact that the assessee also filed additional evidence enclosing copy of 7/12 extract of the land and credit facilities availed by him and considering the facts in entirety, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee deserves remand of proceedings to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for denovo disposal. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for denovo adjudication of the issues in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 26th day of June, 2024.
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mufti Clothing And Co vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 16 Oct 2026
- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026