MAYA RAJENDRA KUMBHAR,PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 14(5), PUNE

ITA 1614/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Maya Rajendra Kumbhar against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which was passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The appeal was related to the assessment year 2012-13 and was directed against an assessment order that was passed under sections 144 and 147 of the Act, concerning a cash deposit of Rs.10,95,000 in the assessee's bank account. The Tribunal noted a significant delay of 399 days in filing the appeal, which was condoned based on the 'reasonable cause' shown by the assessee. The Tribunal also considered the assessee's request for another opportunity to present her case before the JAO, citing her status as an agriculturist and lack of proper guidance from her tax consultant.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772155 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY DHIVARE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRATIK SANDBHOR
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1614/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Maya Rajendra Kumbhar Gulunche Kumbhar Wada, Nira, Morgaon Road, Walha, Purandar-412305, Maharashtra PAN: DTEPK1490N Vs. ITO, Ward-14(5), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 20.03.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 30.08.2019 passed u/s.144 r.w.s147 of the Act. 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 399 days in preferring the instant appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons which led to delay in filing of the appeal. 3. After hearing both the sides and perusing the averments made in the affidavit, I am satisfied that due to ‘reasonable cause’ assessee failed to file the appeal within the stipulated time. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court Appellant by : Shri Pratik Sandbhor Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Dhivare Date of hearing : 13.08.2025 Date of pronouncement : 26.08.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1614/PUN/2025 Maya Rajendra Kumbhar 2 Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 399 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for providing one more opportunity to go before ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer stating that the assessee could not make proper compliance before the lower authorities. He further stated that the assessee is an Agriculturist and was not well guided by the Tax Consultant about the assessment proceedings and therefore prayed for one more opportunity to file the requisite details in support of its grounds of appeal. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 6. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. I find that assessee in the instant case failed to appear before ld. Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act for A.Y. 2012-13 which was initiated on the basis of information about cash deposit of Rs.10,95,000/- in the bank account of the assessee held with The Baramati Sah. Bank Ltd. Due to non- compliance, ld. AO concluded the proceedings passing best judgment assessment u/s.147 r.w.s.144 by making addition of total cash deposit of Rs.10,95,000/-. However, before ld.CIT(A) assessee failed to appear. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that the assessee is an Agriculturist and not well versed with income-tax provisions and technicalities and further was not guided well by the Tax Consultant. Under these facts and circumstances, I hereby deem it proper to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1614/PUN/2025 Maya Rajendra Kumbhar 3 restore the issues raised on merit to the file of ld. JAO for denovo assessment. Needless to mention that ld.JAO in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is hereby set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 26th day of August, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 26th August, 2025. Satish 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. Printed from counselvise.com "