GANESH RAMNATH DHOOT,SAMBHAJINAGAR V. ITO, WARD-1(1), AURANGANAD, AURANGABAD

ITA 2367/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ganesh Ramnath Dhoot, the appellant, who contested an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which had dismissed his appeal in limine due to non-compliance with hearing notices. The original reassessment by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) resulted in a significant increase in the assessed income for the Assessment Year 2013-14, based on substantial cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to respond to multiple notices and adjournments but decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits, citing the need for a fair hearing and referencing relevant judicial precedents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 786514 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MILIND DEBAJE
• Assessee Lawyers: SANTOSH GARUD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.2367/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year 2013-2014) Ganesh Ramnath Dhoot, Flat no.04, Plot No.14/15, Suprabhat Residency, Khivansara Park, Ulkanagari Chh. Sambhajinagar-431001 PAN : ARNPD 5408 K vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Santosh Garud, CA For Revenue : Shri Milind Debaje, JCIT-DR (through virtual) Date of Hearing : 18.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 21.11.2025 ORDER PER : MANISH BORAD, AM This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/ Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi [“CIT(A)”], dated 01/07/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”), which is arising out of assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 28/03/2022 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA.No.2367/PUN./2025 (Ganesh Ramnath Dhoot) 2. Registry has informed that there is a delay of 13 days in filing the instant appeal. Application for condonation of delay along with affidavit has been furnished and the delay is on account of non-communication by the Tax Consultant who is looking after the tax matters and the assessee had no knowledge about passing of appellate order, hence, the delay has occurred. Considering the fact that the assessee is totally dependent on the Tax Consultant for taxation and appeal works, and the delay is not intentional, we, therefore, adopting a justice oriented approach and also taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), hereby condone the delay of 13 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the same for adjudication. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee fairly accepted that the assessee could not file the details called for by the Ld.CIT(A) even though various opportunities were granted and the assessee mostly sought adjournments, as a result of which, Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without dealing on merits of the case. The only prayer made is for providing one more opportunity for adjudication of all the issues raised in the instant appeal by the Ld.CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA.No.2367/PUN./2025 (Ganesh Ramnath Dhoot) 4. Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), on the other hand, did not oppose the request made by the learned counsel for the assessee. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and income of Rs. 2,88,990/- declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 furnished on 29/03/2014. Based on the information about the substantial cash deposit in the bank account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., reassessment proceedings were initiated after duly serving notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The Ld.AO carried out re-assessment proceedings and assessed income at Rs. 42,41,525/- after making addition of Rs. 39,52,535/-. 5. In the appeal filed before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee sought adjournments on the dates of hearing fixed on 29/05/2024 & 10/07/2024, but failed to comply with the notices of hearing fixed for 09/08/2024 and 23/05/2025 due to such non-compliance, Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine observing that assessee doesn’t want to pursue the appeal, but Ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case. 6. Admittedly, the assessee has not responded to the notices of hearing issued by the Ld.CIT(A) and also not filed Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA.No.2367/PUN./2025 (Ganesh Ramnath Dhoot) necessary details, therefore, Ld.CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without dealing with the merits of the case. The Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (Bombay) [2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bom.) has held that Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits, even in an ex-parte order. In view of the above judgment and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and passing a speaking order as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that Ld.CIT(A) shall grant fair hearing of opportunity to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. 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 in the open Court on 21.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [VINAY BHAMORE] [MANISH BORAD] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pune, Dated 21st November, 2025 Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA.No.2367/PUN./2025 (Ganesh Ramnath Dhoot) vr/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Pune concerned. 4. D.R. ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. By Order //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "