SHRI MANGESH RAMESH METKAR, NASHIK V. ITO, WARD 1(4), NASHIK

ITA 962/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Mangesh Ramesh Metkar, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which dismissed his appeal for non-prosecution regarding the assessment year 2012-13. The appellant had initially declared a total income of Rs.2,25,540, but subsequent investigations revealed involvement in bogus long-term capital gains. The Assessing Officer, based on this information, issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and assessed long-term capital gains of Rs.4,83,828. The NFAC dismissed the appeal without considering the merits, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 137660 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-04-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-04-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay; Capital Gains
• Section: 148; 271(1)(c); 143(3); 274

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.962/PUN/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Mangesh Ramesh Metkar, Flat No.2, Chinmay Niwas, Khandre Nagar, Nashik Road, Sinnar Phata, Nashik- 422101. PAN : AMXPM5274F Vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Nashik. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 25.11.2021 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual deriving income under head “salaries” and “business income”. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2012-13 was filed by the appellant on 18.04.2013 declaring total income of Rs.2,25,540/-. Subsequently, based on the information received from the Investigation Wing of the Income Tax Department, Assessee by : None Revenue by : Smt. Sonal L. Sonkavde Date of hearing : 11.04.2023 Date of pronouncement : 11.04.2023 ITA No.962/PUN/2022 2 Mumbai that the appellant is one of the beneficiaries of bogus long terms capital gains and traded in the script Diamant Infrastructure Ltd., the Assessing Officer issued a notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) on 31.03.2019. In response to which, no return of income had been filed by the appellant. The appellant also not furnished any information justifying the genuineness of the transactions of purchase and sale of shares of Diamant Infrastructure Ltd. and, accordingly, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment to best of his judgment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 by bringing to tax long term capital gains of sale consideration of Rs.4,83,828/-. 3. Being aggrieved by the above addition, an appeal was preferred before the NFAC. The NFAC vide order dated 25.11.2021 dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. When the matter was called on, none appeared on behalf of the appellant-assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. 6. At the outset, there is a delay in filing of the present appeal by 216 days from 30.05.2022 to 31.12.2022. The appellant filed a condonation petition seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the appellant had not received the physical copy of the order of the NFAC and he had come to know of the order of the NFAC only ITA No.962/PUN/2022 3 when he received show-cause notice u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) in second week of September, 2022. It is submitted that from September, 2022 he was suffering from the Spondylosis/Spine Issues and the doctors had advised him to avoid travelling for six months and in support of these contentions, he also filed a doctor’s certificate. It is further submitted that owing to his health problem, he could not travel to Pune from his native place, Nashik to take steps for filing the appeal. Thus, it is pleaded that since the delay in filing the present appeal was caused on account of reasonable cause and, therefore, the same may be condoned. 7. On the other hand, ld. Sr. DR has no serious objection for condoning the delay. 8. In the light of fact that averments made in the petition for condonation of delay remain uncontroverted, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case for condonation of delay. Accordingly, I admit the appeal for adjudication. 9. Having heard the ld. Sr. DR and perused the material on record, I find that the NFAC initiated the proceedings for hearing of the appeal during the period falling within the Pandemic Covid-19 i.e. 28.01.2021 to 06.10.2021. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC) dated 10.01.2022 taking the cognizance of difficulties being faced by the citizens of the country on account of Pandemic ITA No.962/PUN/2022 4 Covid-19 extended the prescribed limitations under all Statutes till 29.05.2022. This only goes to show that non-compliance with the statutory notices during the Pandemic Covid-19 period is on account of reasonable cause. Furthermore, I find that the NFAC merely dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without going into the merits of the issue in appeal contrary to the settled position of law that even in the case of an ex-parte order, the ld. CIT(A) should dispose of the issues in appeal on merits. For the above reasons, I remand the matter to the file of NFAC to decide the issue in appeal on merits in accordance with law. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 11 th day of April, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 11 th April, 2023. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.