BINNY KOHLI,PUNE V. ITO, WARD-14(1), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 2648/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by the assessee, Binny Kohli, against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment years 2016-17 to 2018-19. The appeals were initially dismissed by the ld.CIT(A) due to being barred by limitation. The assessee sought to condone the delay citing severe medical problems in her family as the reason for the late filing. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and following precedents, decided to condone the delay and restore the appeals for fresh consideration on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826635 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 12-11-2025
• 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: MANISH SINHA
• Assessee Lawyers: S SON ABHISHEK BANBAH; S HUSBAND RAJESH BANBAH; PRIYESH KHIRAD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause
• Section: 147

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 Nos.2648 to 2650/PUN/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Binny Kohli, Flat No.202, Gloriosa Building, Nyati Exotica, Near Delhi Public School, Mohammed Wadi, Pune 411060 Maharashtra PAN : ALUPK4311M Vs. ITO, Ward-14(1), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BOARD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeals at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Yrs. 2016-17 to 2018-19 are directed against the separate orders dated 17.09.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of respective Assessment Orders dated 06.05.2023, 10.03.2022 and 24.03.2023 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to delay in filing of the appeals before ld.CIT(A) the appeals have been dismissed being barred by limitation. He submitted to due to severe medical problem in the assessee’s Appellant by : Shri Priyesh Khirad (Through Virtual) Respondent by : Shri Manish Sinha (Through Virtual) Date of hearing : 22.12.2025 Date of pronouncement : 06.01.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2648 to 2650/PUN/2025 Binny Kohli 2 family the appeals could not be filed before ld.CIT(A) in time owing to ‘reasonable cause’ and therefore prayed for granting one more opportunity to the assessee by condoning the delay and restoring the appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Ld. DR on the other hand supported the impugned orders. 3. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessee is an individual and assessments for A.Yrs. 2016-17 to 2018-19 have been completed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act and various additions have been made in the hands of assessee against which the assessee preferred appeals before ld.CIT(A) but with delay. Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeals without condoning the delay. Reasons for the delay stated before the ld.CIT(A) reads as under : “Subject: Condonation of delay in submission of Appeal u/s 246A for F.Y. 2015-16. Honorable Sir/Madam, Concerning the subject mentioned above, the Assessee in pursuance submits as following: 1. That, the Assessee is a housewife who is in receipt of the Assessment Order U/s 147 r.w.s.144 and Notice of demand U/s 156 as above mentioned with a demand of lax amounting Rs. 30,69,841.00, aggrieved by the said order the Assessee ought to have filed an appeal. 1. That, the appeal was to he filed by 15/04/2022. 2. That, the delay in submission of the appeal having been caused by circumstances entirely beyond Assessee's control of 707 days. 3. That, the Assessee was finding it difficult to deal with on such matter of assessment order and demand notice Because of the medical reasons with regard to herself and in the family as briefed below: Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2648 to 2650/PUN/2025 Binny Kohli 3 a. For The Assessee herself The Assessee has had anxiety and hypertension and that she have been advised to take rest and avoid making long, journey for the last 600 days. A medical certificate is attached with this document. b. For the Assessee's Son Mr Abhishek Banbah Mr. Abhishek Banbah is Assessee's Son who is currently suffer from eye vision problem from January 2023. Thereafter, he underwent to an eye surgery in December 2023 and though still lacing the issue continuously with the follow-up of the learn of doctors and experts. The relevant medical document arc attached herewith. This led to a delay of 300 days in the matter. c. For the Assesses' s father in law Lt. Col. (Reid) Kallash Chandra Banbah The Assessee's Father in law Lt. Col. (Retd) Kailash Chandra Banbah is suffering from heart related problems for last few years for which he had also been to a surgery for implantation of pacemaker in November 2020. The Relevant medical document is attached for treatment is attached herewith. d. For the Assessee's Husband Mr. Rajesh Banbah The Assessee's husband, Mr. Rajesh Banbah, suffers from Diabetes and thyroid disorder for Last few years. The medical reports of Mr Rajesh Man bah is attached herewith. This had ailed her for the delay of 70 days. Hence, the Assessee had been lo such an agony with facing of health related problems in the family and herself being having hypertension and anxiety. 5. That, the Assessee though being in such agony of health issues, also had no proper guidance and non-availability of consultant on such matters with being a housewife. 6. That, the Assessee disagrees with the Assessment Order and Notice of Demand as passed by the Income Tax Officer, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, and willing to file an Appeal against the said Order. Hence, it is humbly prayed to your honor to consider the matter for the above said reasons and grant a condonation for the delay in filing an appeal thereof. And for this act of kindness, the Assessee, as duty bound, shall ever pray. Hoping for a favorable response.” Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2648 to 2650/PUN/2025 Binny Kohli 4 4. We on going through the above reasons putforth by the assessee giving rise to delay in filing the appeals before ld.CIT(A), are satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee in filing the instant appeals within the stipulated time. We find the delay in filing the appeals is not intentional and assessee would not have gained by delaying the filing of appeals. We therefore taking justice oriented approach and following the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme 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) condone the delay in filing of the appeals before ld.CIT(A). 5. Since ld.CIT(A) has not decided the issues on merit, we in the interest of justice are inclined to set aside the impugned orders by restoring all the issues raised in the instant appeals in the three assessment years under consideration to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee in the set aside proceedings. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned orders are set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA Nos.2648 to 2650/PUN/2025 Binny Kohli 5 6. In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 06th day of January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 06th January, 2026. 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 // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "