ABHISHEK WAHEE,MUMBAI V. ITO PNE WARD 58(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1273/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Abhishek Wahee, the appellant, who challenged the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issue was the dismissal of his appeal by the CIT(A) due to it being filed beyond the permissible period. The appellant provided a detailed explanation for the delay, citing non-receipt of notices and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on his and his accountant's ability to manage deadlines. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's reasons and decided to condone the delay, emphasizing the need to prioritize substantial justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705409 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., [1987] AIR 1353 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MADHURA M. NAYAK
• Assessee Lawyers: KIRAN MEHTA
• Keywords: Non compliance
• Section: 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1273/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Abhishek Wahee 901, 9th Floor, Mahesh Towers, Gilbert Hall, Mumbai – 400053. Vs. ITO PNE Ward 58(1) PAN/GIR No. AAWPW0511E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Kiran Mehta Revenue by Ms. Madhura M. Nayak, SR. DR. Date of Hearing 07.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement 03.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 31.12.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. From the records, we noticed that the assessee was ex-parte before the Ld.AO and Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as the same was filed beyond the period of 2 ITA No.1273/Mum/2025 Abhishek Wahee limitation and consequently while dismissing the application for condonation of delay, the appeal was dismissed. 3. We have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed on record and the orders passed by the revenue authorities. 4. From the records, we noticed that assessee has filed a detailed explanation thereby explaining the reason for seeking condonation of delay. The assessee has mentioned reasons for non compliance before the CIT(A) in affidavit as under: I, Abhishek Wahee, residing at 901, 9Th Floor, Mahesh Tower, Azad Nagar S.O (Mumbai), MUMBAI, 400053, having PAN- AAWPW0511E do hereby state and declare on solemn affirmation as under: 1) That, I am assessed to income-tax under PAN AAWPW0511E. 2) That for Assessment Year: 2017-18 my case was selected for scrutiny assessment and I had received the assessment order u/s 144 dated 26/12/2019 by post on 4th January, 2020. I had not received the assessment order on the e-mail ID given on my IT Portal. 3) That, notice of hearing u/s 143(2) dated 22/09/2019 and notice of hearing u/s 142(1) dated 24/12/2019 were not received by me by mail or otherwise. The email id given by me on my Income Tax portal was [e-mail]. Screenshot of the portal on which the email is stated is attached. 3 ITA No.1273/Mum/2025 Abhishek Wahee 4) That I was aggrieved by an addition of Rs. 13,17,000 made u/s 69A in the said assessment and That I had referred this order to Mr. Vaibhav Dalvi. Mr Vaibhav Dalvi was the accountant who was looking after my accounts and taxation matters. 5) That, Mr. Dalvi had engaged CA Neeti Mishra, a practicing Chartered Accountant to file an appeal on my behalf before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in matters relating to A.Y. 2017-18. 6) That, I was under an impression that the needful was being done but it seems that filing of the appeal in reference by CA Neeti Mishra got delayed and then there was lock- down following the global pandemic of Covid from 21st March, 2020. 7) Due to the Global Pandemic of Covid and lock-downs that ensued from time to time completely disrupted the day to day affairs of CA Neeti Mishra and also at my end we completely lost track of the appeal that was required to be filed against the assessment order for AY: 2017-18 in reference. 8) That, in August 2023, I had engaged Mr. J. S. Bhatia, proprietor, J. S. Bhatia and Co, Chartered Accountants, having his address at F- 140/141 Moongipa Arcade, D N Nagar, Mumbai- 400053, to finalize my accounts and conduct the tax audit for F.Y. 2022-23 and file my return for that year and that, in pursuance to this, Mr. J. S. Bhatia conducted tax audit and filed the Tax Audit report in Form 3CB/3CD on 30th September 2023 and filed the Income Tax return on 09th October 2023. 9) That, it was during this period i.e. August/ September 2023, when Mr. J. S. Bhatia went through my tax records and my account on IT Portal that he informed me that no appeal had been filed for A.Y. 2017-18. It was upon realizing this omission in second week of October, 2023, that the appeal before the learned CIT (A) was filed on 2/11/2023 i.e. within a period of 30 days from realization of omission to file the said appeal. 10) That I have been settled in Mumbai since 2014 and that I have been filing the Income Tax Returns on Mumbai Address 4 ITA No.1273/Mum/2025 Abhishek Wahee since A.Y 2016-17. However, for reasons beyond my comprehension, my case for the year in reference was transferred by the PR CIT-9, Mumbai to Delhi for assessment. 5. Considering the entire factual position as explained before us and also keeping in view, the principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., [1987] AIR 1353 (SC), wherein it has been held that where substantial justice is pitted against technicalities of non-deliberate delay, then in that eventuality substantial justice is to be preferred. In our view the principals of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Hence considering the explanation put forth by the Assessee by justifiably and properly explaining the delay which occurred in filing the appeal and construing the expression \"sufficient cause\" liberally we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before Ld. CIT(A). 6. Since we have already condoned the delay, therefore we restore the matter back to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for deciding the same on merits after providing fair opportunity of hearing to both the parties. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 5 ITA No.1273/Mum/2025 Abhishek Wahee 7. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld.CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 8. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 03.07.2025 Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 03/07/2025 KRK, PS आदेश की \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. \u000eथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0019 / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु\u0019(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,मु\u0003बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, स\u000eािपत ित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई / ITAT, Mumbai "