MR. GAURAV RAJENDRA MALU,JAYSINGPUR V. PCIT, PUNE, PUNE

MA 53/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Gaurav Rajendra Malu, the appellant, who filed a Misc. Application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning an earlier Tribunal order dated 05/05/2025 for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The application pointed out that certain grounds of appeal (5(a), 5(b), & 6) were not addressed in the Tribunal's previous order. These grounds pertained to the completion of assessment proceedings by the Faceless Assessing Officer due to time constraints and the implications of setting aside the assessment order for further verification, which could extend the statutory period of limitation under section 153(2) of the Act. The application also contested the appreciation of evidence by the Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which favored the assessee based on a jurisdictional High Court judgment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787658 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 17-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 09-06-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Mukesh Ratilal Marolia, Income Tax Appeal No. 456 of 2007 dated 07-09-2011
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHARAT ANDHALE
• Assessee Lawyers: HARI KRISHAN
• Keywords: Period of limitation

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “A” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A.No. 53/PUN/2025 (Arising out of I.T.A.No. 1206/PUN/2024) (Assessment Year 2017-2018) Gaurav Rajendra Malu, 237, Chandan Bungalow, Azad Road, 80th Lane, Jaysingpur-416101, Maharashtra. PAN : ALKPM 9403 C vs. PCIT, Pune-1. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Hari Krishan, AR For Revenue : Shri Bharat Andhale, Addl.CIT- DR (through virtual) Date of Hearing : 10.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 17.11.2025 ORDER PER : MANISH BORAD, AM This Misc. Application u/s. 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, „the Act‟) at the instance of the assessee is arising out of the order of this Tribunal in ITA No. 1206/PUN/2024, dated 05/05/2025 for the A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The sole substantive grievance of the assessee through this Misc. Application is that an apparent mistake has occurred in the impugned order, as the Tribunal has not Printed from counselvise.com 2 MA.No.53/PUN./2025 (Gaurav Rajendra Malu) adjudicated the following ground Nos. 5(a), 5(b) & 6 which form part of the revised grounds of appeal:- “5. (a) As mentioned on page 10 para 4.1 of the impugned revision order the assessment proceedings in this case have been completed in view of the paucity of time available to the Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO). (b) In view of this, setting aside the assessment order to the file of the Assessing Officer for further verification of the issues amounts to indirectly extending the period of limitation provided by the statute u/s 153(2) of the Income Tax Act for completing the assessment, which is not permissible under the law. 6. The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has failed to appreciate that the Assessing Officer has taken the view in favour of the assessee, by following the binding judgement of the Jurisdictional High Court of Bombay in the case of Mukesh Ratilal Marolia, Income Tax Appeal No. 456 of 2007 dated 07-09-2011, after examining the documentary evidence filed by the assessee in support of his submissions with regard to the transactions in M/s Greencrest Financial Services Ltd.” 3. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. With the assistance of both the sides, we on perusal of the impugned order found that ground Nos. 5(a), 5(b) & 6 of the revised grounds of appeal remained to be adjudicated. Ld.DR has raised no objection if the appeal is re-fixed for the limited purpose of adjudicating the grounds Nos. 5(a), 5(b) & 6. 4. We, accordingly, direct the Registry to re-fix this appeal for hearing on 18/11/205 for the limited purpose of adjudicating ground Nos. 5(a), 5(b) & 6 raised by the assessee in Form No.36 with the appeal ITA No. 1026/PUN/2024 and to Printed from counselvise.com 3 MA.No.53/PUN./2025 (Gaurav Rajendra Malu) this extent, this Misc. Application filed by the assessee is allowed. 5. In the result, Misc. Application filed by the Assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17.11.2025. Sd/- Sd/- [VINAY BHAMORE] [MANISH BORAD] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pune, Dated 17th November, 2025 vr/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The CIT(A), Pune concerned. 4. D.R. ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. By Order //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "