DAULAT SAVALA NARUTE,PUNE V. ITO WARD 5(20, PUNE

ITA 520/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Daulat Savala Narute, an individual and agriculturalist, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre which was based on a reassessment order for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The reassessment added Rs.51,19,500 to the assessee's income, significantly higher than the returned income of Rs.2,29,970. The assessee did not initially appear before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A), leading to the dismissal of his appeal in limine by the CIT(A). The ITAT admitted the legal issues raised for the first time and decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination, emphasizing the need for a fair opportunity for the assessee to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789699 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee, Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT, National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT, Divine Infracon Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UDOL RAJ SINGH
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.520/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Daulat Savala Narute, At Roti, Patas Baramat Road B.O., Pune 412 219 Maharashtra PAN : AMMPN6366Q Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 25.11.2024 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre emanating out of Assessment Order dated 20.02.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 27 days in filing the instant appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for delay. Contents of the same read as under : “1. That I am an individual and agriculturalist. 2. That I am not well versed with the Tax Provisions and e- assessment proceedings. Appellant(s) by : Shri Sarang Gudhate Respondent by : Shri Udol Raj Singh Date of hearing : 10.11.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.11.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.520/PUN/2025 Daulat Savala Narute 2 3. That in my case, Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax has passed Appeal Order on 25th Nov 2024 Ex-party. 4. That due to lack of knowledge and as I am not well versed with the e-assessment proceedings, I could not submit the reply. The non- compliance was not intentional. 5. That when abovementioned order was received, I approached to a Tax Consultant. I assumed that he is handling the case, but he never revert it to me. This causes the delay in filling of appeal. 6. That there is delay of 27 days in filing of appeal. 7. That the appeal is filed on a meritorious matter and deserves to be addressed on the grounds of merits. Non allowance of the appeal would cause unnecessary hardship to the Appellant when actually the remedy is available in the law itself. 8. That the Appeal is filed on legal grounds. 9. That there is no mala fide intention in late filing the Appeal. In the light of above, the Appellant seeks your honor's mercy to condone the delay and grant the appeal as the delay was not intentional.” 3. On perusing the averments made in the affidavit, we are satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. We note that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex 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 of 27 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. After carefully hearing ld. Counsel for the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative, we observe that due to non appearance of the assessee before ld.CIT(A), appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in limine by ld.CIT(A) referring to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.520/PUN/2025 Daulat Savala Narute 3 the principle embodied in the well known latin dictum “Vigilantibus Et Non Dormientibus Jura Sub Veniunt” and also placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N. Bhattacharjee (1979) 118 ITR 461 (SC) and the judgment of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar vs. CWT 223 ITR 480 (MP). Therefore, ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed for remitting the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication along with making a request to admit the legal issue raised in the additional grounds of appeal. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and the reassessment proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act has been carried out for A.Y. 2015-16 and addition of Rs.51,19,500/- has been made as against the returned income of Rs.2,29,970/-. Income assessed at Rs.53,49,470/-. Admittedly, the assessee has not availed the opportunities granted by ld. AO resulting into passing of Best Judgment Assessment and even in the appeal filed before ld.CIT(A) assessee has raised only one ground that the assessee earns only Agricultural income which is exempt from tax and all cash deposits are from Agricultural income. However, assessee failed to appear before ld.CIT(A) and the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine. Before us, assessee has raised various legal issues challenging the legality of the reassessment proceedings. We have gone through the legal issues and in view of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.520/PUN/2025 Daulat Savala Narute 4 CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383(SC) the same are admitted for adjudication. 6. The issue of Tribunal’s power to adjudicate the ground raised before it in second appeal which did not pass through first appeal came for consideration before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Divine Infracon Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT’ [2025, 171 taxmann.com 92 (Del)], wherein their Hon’ble Lordship vide para 13 have categorically held that, the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to proceed to decide the ground which did not arise from the impugned order passed by first appellate authority, irrespective of such ground was raised in first appeal or not. 7. Under these given facts and circumstances, since the legal issues has been raised for the first time before this Tribunal which though admitted in light of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) we are of the view that the same deserves to be adjudicated by ld.CIT(A). We therefore remit back the legal issues and the issues raised on merits by the assessee for the year under consideration to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that in the set aside proceedings ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and all the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.520/PUN/2025 Daulat Savala Narute 5 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 28th day of November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 28th November, 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, “A” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” 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 "