Ketki Mukesh Patel, Mumbai V. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune, Pune

ITA 1364/PUN/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7347 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-05-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 18-03-2024
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1364/PUN/2023 नधा रण वष : Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ketki Mukesh Patel, Plot No.72, Chintan Bunglow, 9 th Road, JVPD Juhu Scheme, Juhu S.O., Mumbai -400049 Maharashtra PAN : AAFPP6405K Vs. CIT (A)-12, Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the CIT(A), Pune-12, Pune dated 31.12.2021 for the assessment year 2014-15 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are as under : The appellant is an individual deriving income from share of profit from a partnership firm. Search and seizure operations u/s.132 of the Act in the Deesan group of cases and the residential premises of the appellant were conducted on 17.01.2018. Notice u/s.153A was issued to Assessee by : Shri Akash Gogari Revenue by : Shri Keyur Patel Date of hearing : 08.05.2024 Date of pronouncement : 08.05.2024 ITA No.1364/PUN/2023 2 the appellant on 24.01.2019. In response to notice u/s.153A, the appellant filed the Return of Income on 19.02.2019 disclosing total income of Rs.9,62,827/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 28.12.2019 at a total income of Rs.12,52,830/-. While doing so, the AO made addition of Rs.2,90,000/- on protective basis. 3. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide impugned order dismissed the assessee’s claim. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in this present appeal with the delay of 651 days. It is submitted that the delay had occurred on account of serving the order passed u/s.250 on Mr. Kutty Chettariyil, an employee of the group, who subsequently died in an accident. Therefore, it is prayed that the delay in filing the appeal be condoned. 5. Having regard to the averments made in the condonation petition, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant is prevented by a sufficient reasonable cause in not filing the appeal within the prescribed period of limitation. Accordingly, we condone the appeal in filing the appeal before us and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. ITA No.1364/PUN/2023 3 6. At the outset, we find the CIT(A) had discussed the issue of additions on account of jewellery, bullion, silver articles which does not form the subject matter of appeal before him. In the present case, the issue in appeal is with regard to protective addition of Rs.2,90,000/- made by the AO disbelieving the agricultural income. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of CIT(A) to decide the issue in appeal afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the appellant in accordance with law. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 08 th day of May, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S. GODARA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 08 th May, 2024 Satish आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT concerned 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” ब च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune