MEGHRAJ SHANKAR BAHIRAT ,PUNE V. ITO WARD - 2(2) , PUNE

ITA 2875/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Meghraj Shankar Bahirat against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2018-19. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance by the assessee, without adjudicating on the merits. The assessee had not filed a valid return of income, and the Assessing Officer had issued a notice under section 148 based on information about a property sale. The Tribunal found that both the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) failed to obtain a copy of the sale deed, which was crucial for adjudicating the case. Citing a precedent from the Bombay High Court, the Tribunal held that the CIT(A) must decide the appeal on its merits and cannot dismiss it for non-prosecution.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 847712 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Pune
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 28-11-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Pr.CIT(Central) Vs.Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SAILEE DHOLE; THROUGH
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEPA KHARE
• Keywords: Set aside; Non compliance
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2875/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Meghraj Shankar Bahirat, Sr No.144 Baburao Vastad Chawal, Bhau Patil Road, Bopodi, Pune-411020 Maharashtra PAN-BHFPB3578R Vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by Smt Deepa Khare Revenue by Sailee Dhole, JCIT (through virtual) Date of hearing 23-03-2026 Date of Pronouncement 26-03-2026 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the Order of Commissioner of Income Tax(appeal) for AY 2018-19 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 on 16/09/2025 emanating from the Assessment Order u/s 147 rws 144 dated 08/03/2023 for AY 2018-19. Findings and Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case it is mentioned in the Assessment Order that Assessee had not filed any valid return of Income. It is mentioned in the Assessment Order that the Assessing Officer(AO) had received information on the INSIGHT Portal of the Income Tax Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2875/PUN/2025 Department regarding sale of immovable property of Rs. 5018933/- by the Assessee during the year. Hence AO issued notice u/s 148 on 31/03/2022. The Assessee failed to comply any of the notices. Hence AO passed an ex-party assessment order u/s 144 . 2.1 Aggrieved by the Assessment Order the Assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal). The assessee raised following grounds before the Ld.CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2875/PUN/2025 2.2 However, it is observed that Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated any of the grounds raised by the assessee on merits but merely dismissed the Appeal of the Assessee for Non compliance. 3. Ld.AR merely requested to set aside the order of CIT(A) for denovo adjudication to CIT(A). Ld.AR submitted that assessee will file details before the CIT(A). Ld.AR has not filed any document before us. 3.1 Ld.DR was appearing virtually and she was on rotation duty. She relied on the order of AO. 4. In this case apparently it seems that Assessee had sold immovable property. But the Assessee has not filed copy of the impugned Sale Deed before us. It is also observed from the Assessment Order that the Assessing Officer was also not having copy of the impugned Sale deed. Thus, neither the AO nor the CIT(A) has bothered to find out the basic fact and has bothered to get copy of the impugned Sale. 5. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs.Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay)/[2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) asunder : Quote, “8.From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act. Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do all that Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2875/PUN/2025 Assessing Officer could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the Assessing Officer to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” Unquote. Thus, Hon’ble Bombay High Court has categorically held that CIT(A) has to decide the appeal on merit and CIT(A) does not have any power to dismiss appeal for non-prosecution. 6. Since the CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds raised by the assessee on merits, respectfully following Hon’ble Bombay High Court the Order of CIT(A) is set aside to CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7. Accordingly grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 8. In the result Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on this 26 day of March, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (DIPAK RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दिन ांक / Dated: 26 March, 2026. Neeta आिेश की प्रतितितप अग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीि र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.2875/PUN/2025 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. तिभ गीय प्रतितनति, आयकर अपीिीय अतिकरण, \"SMC\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"SMC\" Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ इि / Guard File. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीिीय अतिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "