GAUTAM JAYANT SOPAL,KOLHAPUR V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), KOLHAPUR

ITA 1953/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Gautam Jayant Sopal against the order of the CIT(A), Guwahati, which dismissed his appeal for delay in filing. The assessee had initially filed his income tax return for the assessment year 2021-22, which was processed, resulting in a demand. The first appeal was filed late by 258 days, and the CIT(A) dismissed it without condoning the delay. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient reasons for the delay and directed the CIT(A) to reconsider the appeal, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and the opportunity for the assessee to present his case with supporting documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 24578 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P. MURKUNDE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 20

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1953/PUN/2024 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Gautam Jayant Sopal, Warna Bazar Quarters, Warna Nagar, Nivrutti Colony, Kodoli, Panhala, Kolhapur- 416113. PAN : GLAPS5325D Vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Kolhapur. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 26.06.2024 passed by Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Guwahati [‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. There is a delay of 20 days in filing of the appeal before this Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee has furnished an application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 10.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 27.02.2025 ITA No.1953/PUN/2024 2 condonation of delay that the appellant was prevented by sufficient and reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within time limit prescribed under the Statute. Ld. DR has not raised any serious objection to the request of the assessee. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual furnished his return of income on 03.08.2021 declaring total income of Rs.51,15,620/-. The return was processed u/s 143(1) by an order dated 13.10.2022. A demand of Rs.2,37,350/- was raised in the above intimation order. 4. Since the assessee presented the first appeal belatedly before Ld. CIT(A), with a delay of 258 days, the same was dismissed without condoning the above delay. It is this order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 5. When the appeal was called for hearing neither any application for adjournment was filed nor anybody appeared from the side of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore, we proceed to decide the appeal on merits of the case after hearing Ld. DR and on the basis of material available on record. ITA No.1953/PUN/2024 3 6. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. 7. We have heard Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that the first appeal was filed belatedly with a delay of 258 days before Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the same without condoning the delay. We further find that the assessee has submitted condonation of delay application before Ld. CIT(A) wherein he has stated the reasons of delay. An affidavit in support of condonation of delay application was also produced before Ld. CIT(A). In this regard, we find that the assessee is a salaried employee and sufficiently explained the reasons of delay in filing the first appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Considering the totality of the facts of the case, & in the interest of justice and without going into the merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh after condoning the delay and also after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A) in this regard and produce supporting documents/evidences in ITA No.1953/PUN/2024 4 support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise, Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are partly allowed. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 27th day of February, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (VINAY BHAMORE) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 27th February, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Guwahati. 4. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "