KAMDHENU FOODS,SANGLI V. ITO WARD 1 SANGLI, SANGLI

ITA 689/PUN/2025

AI Insights

Kamdhenu Foods, a partnership firm engaged in the export of grapes, appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2017-18. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not receive the notices of hearing due to an inactive email address provided in Form 35, leading to a delay in filing the appeal. The Tribunal, referencing the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., found reasonable cause for the delay and admitted the appeal for adjudication, setting aside the exparte order and directing a re-hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669058 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., CIT Vs. Multiplan India Ltd., Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT, PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S. SADANANDA SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEPA KHARE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.689/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kamdhenu Foods, 177 Peth Nhag, Gavali Galli, Sangli – 416 416 Maharashtra PAN : AAIFK8508M Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sangli Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the assessment year 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 21.03.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 30.03.2022 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act. 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 286 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Affidavit for condonation of delay has been filed stating as follows : “I state that I am a partner in Partnership Firm M/s Kamdhenu Foods which is engaged in the business of export of grapes. I state that assessment in case of M/s Kamdhenu Foods for AY 2016-17 was passed on 30.03.2022 u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act assessing income at Rs.2602709/-and assessment for AY 2017-18 Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by : Shri S. Sadananda Singh Date of hearing : 19.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2025 ITA No.689/PUN/2025 Kamdhenu Foods 2 was passed on 30.03.2022 u/s.147 assessing my income at Rs 3072170/-, I filed appeal before CIT(A) for both the years. I state that the email ID provided in Form 35 was [e-mail]. However, the notices of hearing u/s.250 of the IT act were sent on [e-mail] which was not active mail id. I state that the notices of hearing u/s.250 were not received in email provided in Form 35. The partners of the firm are required to travel most of the time during the year for the purpose of business. The appeal for AY 2016-17 was to be decided first and then appeal for AY 2017-18 had to be taken up for hearing. Thereafter my Tax Consultant when logged in Income Tax Account of the firm, found that an Order u/s 250 for AY 2016-17 was passed on 15.01.2025 and appeal for AY 2016-17 is filed before Income Tax appellate Tribunal on 13.03.2025. The Tax Consultant then found out the status of appeal for AY 2017-18 when he came to know that the Order u/s 250 was passed on 21.03.2024 much before the appeal for AY 2016-17. We had no knowledge of passing of the order for AY 2017-18. The appeal for AY 2017-18 could not be filed within the prescribed statutory time limit. I state that the appeal for AY 2017-18 before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal are filed on 13.03.2025. There is a delay of 357 days in filing of the present appeal. I state that the delay caused in filing appeal is for bonafide reasons beyond our control. I pray before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal that in the interest of justice, the delay be condoned and the appeals may be decided on merits.” 3. After hearing both the sides and considering the reasons giving rise to the delay and also placing reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107) I find that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee failed to file the appeal within the time limit stipulated under the Act. I therefore condone the delay of 286 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that in absence of any proper response by the assessee, ld.CIT(A) framed exparte order confirming the addition made by ld. Assessing Officer. She requested that matter may please be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary ITA No.689/PUN/2025 Kamdhenu Foods 3 adjudication and the assessee will file all the details along with written submissions before ld.CIT(A). Ld. Departmental raised no objection if the matter is restored to the file of ld.CIT(A). 5. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of export of Grapes by purchasing them from farmers. Case of the assessee for A.Y. 2017-18 selected for scrutiny for issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act and assessment got concluded u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act on 30.03.2022 making addition of Rs.30,72,170/- being 12% of the total turnover of Rs.2.56 crore. Assessee failed to get any relief in the appeal filed before the First Appellate Authority as it failed to give any response to the notices of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A). Therefore, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal applying the decision of Coordinate Bench, Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Multiplan India Ltd. reported in 38 ITD 320 and the judgment of Hon’ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Estate of Late Tukoji Rao Holker Vs. CWT reported in (1997) 223 ITR 480. 6. I have given my thoughtful consideration and unable to persuade to subscribe to the view taken by the lower authorities. Considering the fact that assessee could not substantiate its case by any representation adducing cogent evidences, I am of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the instant appeal and in all fairness the issues raised on merits requires to be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Needless to say that ld.CIT(A) shall in the course of set-aside proceedings afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after ITA No.689/PUN/2025 Kamdhenu Foods 4 considering the submissions/evidences filed by the assessee shall pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. Assessee is directed to provide latest email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 23rd day of June, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 23rd June, 2025. Satish ITA No.689/PUN/2025 Kamdhenu Foods 5 आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune "