Balkrishna Baban Kamthe, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 14 (4), Pune

ITA 1813/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5820 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2019
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1813/PUN/2019 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2008-09 Balkrishna Baban Kamthe, Phursungi, Haveli, Pune 412 308 PAN : AVLPK2988B Vs. ITO, Ward-14(4), Pune (Appellant) (Respondent) आदेश / ORDER PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the CIT(Appeals)-1, Pune on 19-09-2019 in relation to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. I have heard the ld. DR and gone through the relevant material on record. There is no appearance from the sides of the assessee. As such, I am proceeding to dispose off the appeal ex parte qua the assessee. 3. It is seen that the AO re-opened the assessment u/s.148 by means of a notice on the ground that the assessee received Rs.73.00 lakh on sale of land to DSK Group for the project “Dream City” and did not disclose the correct amount of capital gain. After considering the Appellant by None Respondent by Shri S.P. Walimbe Date of hearing 28-03-2022 Date of pronouncement 29-03-2022 ITA No. 1813/PUN/2019 Balkrishna Baban Kamthe 2 assessee’s submissions, the Assessing Officer (AO) completed the assessment by making an addition of Rs.10.90 lakh. The ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex parte dismissing the appeal of the assessee as time barred by 96 days. The first ground of the appeal before the Tribunal states that the ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the valid reasons for the belated filing of the appeal before him. Considering the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to condone the delay in presenting the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Since the ld. CIT(A) failed to decide the appeal on merits, I am of the considered opinion that it would be in the fitness of things if the impugned order is set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for deciding the issues on merits afresh as per law. I order accordingly. Needless to say, the assessee will be given a reasonable opportunity of hearing. 4. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 29 th March, 2022. Sd/- (R.S.SYAL) उपा य / VICE PRESIDENT प ु णे Pune; दनांक Dated : 29 th March, 2022 Satish ITA No. 1813/PUN/2019 Balkrishna Baban Kamthe 3 आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant; 2. यथ / The Respondent; 3. The CIT(A)-1, Pune 4. 5. The Pr.CIT-1, Pune वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील!य अ धकरण, प ु णे “SMC” / DR ‘SMC’, ITAT, Pune; 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशान ु सार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Date 1. Draft dictated on 28-03-2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 29-03-2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member -- JM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. -- JM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS 8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk 10. Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11. Date of dispatch of Order. *