GANPAT VASANT RANDIVE,VILLAGE - TUNGAT, TALUKA - PANDHARPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, PANDHARPUR, PANDHARPUR

ITA 1940/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ganpat Vasant Randive, an uneducated agriculturist from a remote area, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which had dismissed his appeal for non-appearance. The primary issue was the addition of Rs. 10,53,200 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, attributed to large cash deposits during the demonetization period. The Tribunal noted the lack of sufficient opportunity provided to the assessee by the lower authorities and decided to remit the case back to the JAO for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 774029 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 14-08-2025
• 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: MANOJ TRIPATHI; VIRTUAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH BANIS VIRTUAL
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.1940/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Ganpat Vasant Randive, Village Tungat, Post Tungar, Taluka Pandharpur, District Solapur, Maharashtra. PAN : BACPR 6655 R vs. ITO, Ward-2, Pandharpur (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Subhash Banis (virtual) For Revenue : Shri Manoj Tripathi, DR (virtual) Date of Hearing : 08.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10.09.2025 ORDER This appeal at the instance of the assessee for the Assessment Year 2017-18 (A.Y.) is directed against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”], dated 28/03/2025 framed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, Act'). 2. Registry has informed that there is a delay of 139 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay mentioning the reasons which prevented him from filing the present appeal in the prescribed time limit. The assessee is stated to be an uneducated agriculturist, is Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA.No.1940/PUN/2025 (Ganpat Vasant Randive) residing in remote area and leading nomadic life style. Certainly, assessee would not have gained any benefit in filing the appeal with delay. I, therefore, considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), condone the delay of 138 days in filing of the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee along with his joint family owns around 12 acres of agricultural land situated at village Tungat, Taluka Pandharpur, District Solapur, Maharashtra and source of the alleged cash deposits of Rs. 10,53,200/- is the agricultural income earned by the assessee during the year as well as accumulated funds from agricultural income. He further submitted that Ld.AO gave a very short time to furnish the details and even when in the body of the assessment order, the observation of the Ld.AO indicates that the assessee had not furnished any details, but the assessment order for the A.Y. 2017-18 has been passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 29/11/2019. Even before the Ld.CIT(A), two opportunities were given during Covid-19 pandemic period and then after a gap of four years one notice was issued fixing the date on Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA.No.1940/PUN/2025 (Ganpat Vasant Randive) 24/03/2025 and immediately thereafter, the appeal has been dismissed for non-appearance. He, therefore, prayed that an opportunity may please be granted to go before the learned Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and to furnish the relevant details to show the agricultural income earned by the assessee from 12 acres of agricultural land owned by the assessee and his family. 4. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative (DR) though supported the order of the Ld.CIT(A), but did not objected strongly to the request made by the learned counsel for the assessee. 5. I have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before me. The assessee is an individual and e-filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 on 27/03/2018 declaring income of Rs. 31,390/-. After the case selected for scrutiny under CASS for the reason “large value cash deposits during demonetization period, as compared to the returned income”, valid notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served upon the assessee. Due to non-compliance, Ld.AO completed the assessment, making the addition of Rs.10,53,200/- as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the Act. In the appeal preferred before the Ld.CIT(A), no relief was granted as the assessee again failed to appear. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA.No.1940/PUN/2025 (Ganpat Vasant Randive) 6. I observe that Ld.CIT(A) fixed the date of hearing on 09/03/2020 & 11/01/2021 and both the dates fall under the Covid-19 pandemic restrictions prevailed across the country and after a gap of almost 04 years, one notice was issued fixing the case on 24/03/2025 and within 03 days of not receiving reply from the assessee, Ld.CIT(A) has passed the impugned order on 28/03/2025 dismissing the assessee’s appeal. 7. In the course of hearing, learned counsel for the assessee referring to the grounds of appeal and statement of facts has made out a case that the assessee and his family are agriculturists by operation, owning and cultivating the agricultural land measuring 12 acres in a rural area located at village Tungat, Taluka Pandharpur, District Solapur, Maharashtra. I also notice that the assessee has not been provided sufficient opportunity by both the lower authorities, and therefore I deem it appropriate to remit all the issues raised on merits in the instant appeal, to the file of Ld.JAO for denovo adjudication and the same should be carried out after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee and also to provide proper opportunity to file the details of land holding and the agricultural income earned during the year under consideration and then decide the issues in accordance Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA.No.1940/PUN/2025 (Ganpat Vasant Randive) with law. The effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 10.09.2025. Sd/- [MANISH BORAD] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dated : 10th September, 2025 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 // Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "