SUDHIR SAHEBRAO KARLE, PUNE V. ITO Wd. -6(1), PUNE

ITA 1948/PUN/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0634 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2022
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1948/PUN/2019 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sudhir Sahebrao Karle, Sr.No.14, Ahire Gate, Uttamnagar, A/P Shivne, Pune – 411023. PAN: AVFPK 9466 N Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1), Pune. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Kishor Phadke – AR Revenue by Shri M.G.Jasnani – DR Date of hearing 22/07/2022 Date of pronouncement 17/10/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-4, Pune, dated 20.09.2019 for the A.Y.2011-12 emanating from the Ex party assessment order u/s.144 of the Income tax Act . The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-4 erred in holding the delay in filing the appeal cannot be condoned. The appellant prays that the delay be condoned and appeal should be taken up for hearing. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-4 erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,06,25,786/- to the total income of the appellant. ITA No.1948/PUN/2019 Sudhir Sahebrao Karle(A) 2 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A)-4 erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,06,25,786/- without giving proper opportunity to the appellant.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the AO passed order u/s 144 deciding the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,06,25,786/-. The assessee filed belated appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The delay in filling appeal before Ld.CIT(A) was around 47 days. The Ld.CIT(A) did not condoned the delay and did not admit the appeal due to delay. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A) the assessee filed appeal before this tribunal. 3. The Ld.AR explained that the delay in filling appeal was because the assessee is a farmer and had not understood the timelines properly. The Ld.AR submitted that assessee may kindly be granted an opportunity to represent facts properly before the ld.CIT(A). 4. The Ld.DR relied on the orders of the Lower Authorities. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. The Ld.CIT(A) had merely dismissed the appeal as not admitted. In the interest of the justice, we are of the opinion that one more opportunity needs to be given to the assessee. Hence, we set aside the case to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after giving opportunity to the assessee. The Assessee shall file all the relevant documents before ITA No.1948/PUN/2019 Sudhir Sahebrao Karle(A) 3 the CIT(A). Accordingly appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17 th October, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 17 th Oct, 2022/ SGR* आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “बी” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune.