AJEENCKYA FATTESING JAGTAP,PUNE V. ITO, PUNE

ITA 1645/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ajeenckya Fattesing Jagtap, the appellant, contesting an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi, which was initially an ex parte decision due to the appellant's non-compliance on three hearing dates. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2018-19, where additions amounting to Rs.6.20 lakh were made to the returned income of Rs.13,04,580. The appellant sought to condone a delay of 190 days in filing the appeal, attributing it to criminal complaints against him related to fraud by his agents and the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions. The ITAT, considering the circumstances and precedents, condoned the delay and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773922 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARSHIT BARI
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY RANDER
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1645/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ajeenckya Fattesing Jagtap Tower E 2403, Panchshil Towers, Kharadi, Pune 412207, Maharashtra PAN: AFYPJ7222A Vs. ITO, 58, Circle 7, Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 16.10.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 08.02.2021 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 190 days in preferring the instant appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. During the period, when the assessee was required to file the appeal, certain criminal complaints were filed against him on account of some fraud committed by the agents appointed by him. It is also a fact Appellant by : Shri Ajay Rander Respondent by : Shri Harshit Bari Date of hearing : 18.08.2025 Date of pronouncement : 08.09.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1645/PUN/2025 Ajeenckya Fattesing Jagtap 2 that the assessment order was framed during covid-19 pandemic restrictions. Taking into account all these reasons and in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court 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) we are satisfied that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee failed to file the appeal within the stipulated time. We note that the assessee has not gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore condone the delay of 190 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal. 3. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that impugned order is exparte and assessee failed to make compliance on the three dates of hearing which was within a short interval. The only prayer is made to provide one more opportunity to go before ld. CIT(A). 4. Ld. DR supported the order of ld. CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Assessment of assessee for A.Y. 2018-19 framed on 08.02.2021 and additions amounting to Rs.6.20 lakh has been made against the returned income of Rs.13,04,580/- declared in the return filed on 31-10-2018. Appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A) brought no success due to non-compliance. Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudication on merits of the case. 6. Under these given facts and circumstances and considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, we deem it proper to afford one more opportunity to the assessee. Therefore, the issues raised by the assessee in the instant appeal are Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1645/PUN/2025 Ajeenckya Fattesing Jagtap 3 remitted back to the file of ld. CIT(A). Needless to mention that Ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee in the set aside proceedings. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 08th day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 08th September, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "