ANAND GOVIND THATTE,NAGPUR V. ITO, WARD-2(2), NAGPUR

ITA 127/NAG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Anand Govind Thatte, the appellant, who challenged the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2015-16. The primary contention was against the additions made under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Income Tax Act, which the appellant argued were illegal and excessive. The appeal was initially dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to the appellant's non-appearance, attributed to personal and pandemic-related disruptions. Upon becoming aware of the dismissal, the appellant filed an appeal with the ITAT, which was admitted after condoning the delay in filing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24181 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2024
• Other Referred Cases: SHREE BALAJI WOOLLEN MILLS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PRAVEEN KUMAR PRUTHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. WHITE INDUSTRIES AUSTRALIA LTD, JAI INTERNATIONAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAMESH SHARMA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX, U-LIKE PROMOTERS (P) LTD. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHAY Y. MARATHE
• Assessee Lawyers: KAPIL HIRANI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 56(2)(vii)(b)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI K.M. ROY, ACCOUNTANT, MEMBER ITA no.127/Nag./2024 (Assessment Year : 2015–16) Anand Govind Thatte 19, SBI Colony, Behind Police Line Takli Anant Nagar, Nagpur 440 013 PAN – ACZPT1883B ……………. Appellant v/s Income Tax Officer Ward–2(2), Nagpur ……………. Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kapil Hirani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 10/10/2024 Date of Order – 30/10/2024 O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M. The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 08/05/2023, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2015–16. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the assessment as completed under section 143(3) of the Act is illegal, invalid, violative of the principles of natural justice and which deserves to be quashed / set aside as per law and in the interest of justice. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer grossly erred in making an addition of ` 17,29,500, 2 Anand Govind Thatte ITA no.127/Nag./2024 under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. The addition so made is illegal and liable to be deleted as per law and in the interest of justice. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Assessing Officer grossly erred in making an addition of ` 21,43,800, under section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. The addition so made is illegal and liable to be deleted as per law and in the interest of justice. 4. Without prejudice, the additions made under section 56(2)(vii)(b) is highly excessive and which deserves to be substantially reduced in the interest of justice. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals dismissing the appeal of the Appellant is not proper and the appeal of the Appellant deserves proper adjudication in the interest of justice. 6. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, vary and/or withdraw the above grounds of appeal with the kind permission of the Hon’ble Tribunal.” 3. During the course of hearing, the Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 270 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application explaining the cause of such delay which is supported by an Affidavit, the content of which are reproduced below:– “AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY 1. Anand Govind Thatte, do hereby take oath and state on solemn affirmation as under. - 1. That I am assessed to Income Tax vide Permanent Account Number (\"PAN\") - ACZPT1883B. 2. That I had preferred an appeal for AY 2015-16, before the Ld. CIT(Appeals) against order passed by the Assessing Officer dated 14.12.2017. 3. That on account of Covid-19 as well as the fact that my mother left for heavenly abode in September 2019, causing grave disruption to my day- to-day life, I was unable to appear and represent before the Ld. CIT(Appeals). 4. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) adjudicated my appeal ex-parte vide order dated 8.5.2023, the fact of which I was unaware of as the entire proceeding was conducted online and in a faceless manner. 3 Anand Govind Thatte ITA no.127/Nag./2024 5. Recently upon receiving notices proposing levy of penalty for the impugned AY. I became aware that my appeal has been dismissed by Ld. CIT (Appeals). 6. I immediately sought legal opinion on the same and have accordingly preferred the present appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. 7. The impugned appeal is thus delayed on account of the reasons mentioned hereinabove which constitute reasonable cause and the delay cannot be deemed to be wilful nor unreasonable. The delay deserves to be condoned and the appeal deserves to be admitted and heard in the interest of justice. 8. I submit that I have not benefitted in any way from the delayed filing of the appeal and that irreparable loss will be caused to me if the delay is not condoned and the appeal is not admitted. 9. No hardship or prejudice will be caused to the Respondent in case the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted, however if the delay is not condoned and the appeal is not admitted, I will suffer substantially and irreparable loss will be caused. 10. In light of the above facts and in the interest of natural justice I pray before your honours to kindly condone the delay in filing of the appeal. admit the appeal and hear the appeal on merits in the interest of natural justice. 11. I have gone through the contents of paragraphs 1 to 11 herein above and say that they are believed by me to be true. Hence solemnly affirmed, verified and signed at Nagpur on this day of March, 2024.” 4. We have gone through the averments made in the affidavit and thus, we are of the opinion that the assessee is prevented in filing the appeal belatedly and we are satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. Consequently, we condone the delay of 242 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 5. The learned Authorised Representative appearing for the assessee pointed out that the learned CIT(A) / NFAC had summarily dismissed assessee’s appeal without any discussion on merit. He thus invited our 4 Anand Govind Thatte ITA no.127/Nag./2024 attention to the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and particularly Para–6 to 11, which is reproduced below:– “6. The provisions of Sec.250(6) provides that the appellate orders of CIT(A) are to state the points arising out of assessee's appeal. The order shall give out the reasons for such decisions. The underline rationale of the position is that such order is further appealed. 7. Speaking order obviously will enable any party to know positively the points decided in his favor or against. Absence of formulation of the point of decision for want of quality due to the lack of information inadvertently puts the authority in a Quandary. 8. Sec.250(6) expressly embodies such provision, if an asses see fails to appear before the CIT(A) and fails to submit the relevant documents, the CIT(A) is restricted to the disposals of the appeal based on the merits available in the record. 9. This stand was furthered by the High Court in the following Judgements. 1. SHREE BALAJI WOOLLEN MILLS vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ITAT, DELHI 'G' BENCH. ITA. No. 1238 & 1239/De1/2011; Asst. yr. 2005-06 2. PRAVEEN KUMAR PRUTHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITAT, DELHI 'F' BENCH No. 478/De1/2011; Asst. yr. 1999-2000 ITA 3. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. WHITE INDUSTRIES AUSTRALIA LTD, ITAT, BENCH 'C' KOLKATA ITA No. 507/Ko1/2010; Asst yr. 1992-93 4. JAI INTERNATIONAL vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ITAT, JODHPUR BENCH, ITA No. 138/Jc1/2018; Asst. yr. 2012- 13 5. RAMESH SHARMA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ITAT, DELHI 'F' BENCH, ITA No. 2911/De1/2013; Asst. yr. 2006-07 6. ESTATE OF LATE TUKOJIRAO HOLKAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH TAX HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, Misc. Civil Case No. 302 of 1991 7. U-LIKE PROMOTERS (P) LTD. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER VS. OF INCOME TAX,ITAT, DELHI 'H' BENCH, ITA Nos. 1569 to 1572/De1/2009 and 1377 to 1379/De1/2012; Asst. yrs. 1998-99 to 2004-05 10. In view of the above facts the appeal is decided as under: 11. Following the above explained rationale, the appeal stands dismissed.” 5 Anand Govind Thatte ITA no.127/Nag./2024 6. Thus, the learned Counsel for the assessee prayed that one opportunity may be granted to the assessee by restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable the assessee to substantiate its case. 7. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative strongly supported the orders passed by the learned CIT(A). 8. It is astonishing to note that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order without any application of mind, as his unilateral dismissal is divergent of his observations. He is directed to adjudicate the issues raised by the assessee on merits after giving proper opportunity. We order accordingly. 9. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/10/2024 Sd/- V. DURGA RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER Sd/- K.M. ROY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 30/10/2024 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file. True Copy By Order Pradeep J. Chowdhury Sr. Private Secretary Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Nagpur "