AMIN ABDUL WAHAB KASKAR,RATNAGIRI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RATNAGIRI

ITA 282/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Amin Abdul Wahab Kaskar, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC dated 09.07.2024, which arose from an assessment order under sections 143(3) read with 147 of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The assessment included a long-term capital gain of Rs.11,79,635 from the sale of land. The assessee, a senior citizen, faced mobility issues and was not a regular income tax filer, which contributed to a delay in filing the appeal. The ITAT found merit in the reasons for the delay and admitted the appeal for adjudication, noting the assessee's failure to comply with previous hearings and the need for a comprehensive examination of the legal and merit issues raised.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 653231 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) INSC 382
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S. SADANANDA SINGH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 143(3); 54F

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.282/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Amin Abdul Wahab Kaskar, House No.961/B, Kaskar Ali, Pag Chiplun, Ratnagiri- 415605. PAN : DMOPK5188L Vs. ITO, Ward-3, Ratnagiri. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER MANISH BORAD, AM: This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 09.07.2024 which is arising out of the assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act for Assessment Year 2012-13 framed on 06.12.2019 by the ITO, Ward-3, Ratnagiri. 2. When the case was called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee. Even on the previous occasions, when the case was fixed Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri S. Sadananda Singh Date of hearing : 18.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 20.06.2025 ITA No.282/PUN/2025 2 for hearing on 12.03.2025 and 20.05.2025 none appeared physically/virtually even after valid notice of hearing were sent to the assessee. I therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal on the basis of available records and the assistance of Ld. DR. 3. Registry informed that there is a delay of 123 days. Application for condonation of delay dated 29.01.2025 has been filed. On perusal of the same, I notice that the assessee is stated to be senior citizen and his mobility is restricted and not a regular income tax filer. Further, the assessee has claimed that he is not well versed by using the technology and is fully dependent on the tax consultant. I find merit in the reasons stated by the assessee in the condonation application and in view of the recent judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) INSC 382 dated 21.03.2025 and also in the larger interest of justice, taking a liberal approach, so that the issue on merit can be examined and also observing that the assessee would not have gained by delaying in filing of the instant appeal, condone the delay of 123 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. ITA No.282/PUN/2025 3 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CTTIA), NFAC erred in not quashing the assessment order dated 06.12.2019 which is issued without DIN which is a mandatory requirement at the relevant time. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A), NFAC erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer, Ward 3, Ratnagiri (hereinafter referred to as the AO) of not allowing deduction u/s 54F from the Long Term Capital Gain arising from sale of land. The appellant prays that the AO be directed to grant the deduction u/s 54F. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, modify, delete or add a new ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 5. Ld. Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities. 6. I have heard Ld. Departmental Representative and perused the records placed before me. I observe that the assessee, who is an individual, his case selected for scrutiny on account of information about the transactions of sale of immovable property by the assessee along with other persons for a consideration of Rs.1.10 crore. After validly serving the statutory notices, reassessment proceedings were carried out. There was partial compliance by the assessee and Ld. Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings after making the ITA No.282/PUN/2025 4 addition for long term capital gain at Rs.11,79,635/- and assessed the income at Rs.11,80,305/-. 7. Aggrieved the assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC but failed to make any compliance on nine occasions on the dates of hearing mentioned in para 5 of the impugned order. Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC thus passed an ex-parte order. Considering the facts and circumstances and the assessee being a senior citizen and the transaction related to sale of immovable property along with other persons, I deem it appropriate to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to go before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and make necessary submission with regard to legal issue raised in ground of appeal no.1 as well as on merits raised in ground no.2. Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall give proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide all the issues raised in the instant appeal by way of passing a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. All the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.282/PUN/2025 5 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 20th day of June, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 20th June, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "