MRS. MEHER PHEROZ PUDUMJEE,PUNE V. ACIT CIRCLE 5, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 638/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mrs. Meher Pheroz Pudumjee, who appealed against the decision of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) which confirmed the disallowance of a brought forward capital loss of Rs.2,14,51,895 for the assessment year 2016-17. The Central Processing Centre (CPC) had initially disallowed this loss on the grounds that the return for A.Y. 2016-17 was filed late. However, the assessee contended that the return was filed within the extended due date. The CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the assessee's appeal and rectification application, leading to the current appeal before the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775461 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 11-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P. MURKUNDE
• Assessee Lawyers: C. N. NANIWADEKAR
• Section: 143(3); 154

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.638/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Mrs. Meher Pheroz Pudumjee, 5 Clover Garden, Naylor Road, Camp, Pune- 411001. PAN : AGNPP3413B Vs. DCIT, Circle-5, Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.02.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. In the fact and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in confirming the disallowance of brought forward capital loss of Rs.2,14,51,895/- for AY 2016-17 made by CPC on the grounds that return for AY 2016-17 was filed late when in fact the said return for AY 2016-17 was filed within the due date. 2. In the fact and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) erred in not Assessee by : Shri C. N. Naniwadekar Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 07.08.2025 Date of pronouncement : 08.09.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.638/PUN/2025 2 appreciating the submissions made in respect of the application for rectification of appellate order u/s 250 dated 18/01/2024 and consequently rejecting the request for rectification. 3. The Appellant craves leave to add to, withdraw or modify any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed her return of income for assessment year 2021-22 on 30.12.2021 within extended due date of 15.03.2022 declaring income of Rs.1,68,82,930/-. The return of income was processed by CPC u/s 143(1) of the IT Act on 22.04.2022 accepting the income returned by the assessee and also issuing the refund. However, in the intimation issued u/s 143(1) by CPC the brought forward capital loss of Rs.2,14,51,895/- originating from assessment year 2016 – 17 was disallowed by alleging that the return of income of assessment year 2016-17 was filed belatedly. 4. The assessee preferred an appeal against the above intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the IT act. After considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. The assessee then filed rectification application u/s 154 of the IT Act before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for rectifying the appellate order since it was based on wrong finding of fact. This rectification application was also dismissed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC by observing Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.638/PUN/2025 3 that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC may confirm reduce enhance or annul the assessment but not revive his order. 5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. AR appearing from side of the assessee submitted before us that both the orders passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC u/s 250 as well as u/s 154 of the IT Act are unjustified. Ld. AR submitted before the bench that the reason given by CPC that the return of income for assessment year 2016-17 was furnished beyond the due date specified u/s 139(1) of the IT Act is not correct, since the return of income for assessment year 2016-17 was filed on 28.07.2016 within the extended due date of 05.08.2016. Ld. AR further submitted that the case of the assessee for assessment year 2016-17 was subject to scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the IT Act and vide order dated 22.11.2018 the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act wherein no addition was made and the loss of current year to be carried forward was determined at Rs.2,14,51,895/- by the Assessing Officer. Ld. AR accordingly requested before the bench to allow the carry forward of brought forward loss of Rs.2,14,15,895/- which was brought forward from assessment year 2016-17. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.638/PUN/2025 4 7. Ld. DR appearing from side of Revenue relied on the order passed by subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. 8. We have heard Ld. counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that admittedly the return of income for assessment year 2016-17 was filed timely on 28.07.2016 i.e. within the extended due date of 05.08.2016. We further find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC failed to appreciate the fact that the return of income for assessment year 2016-17 was filed on 28.07.2016 and was verified thereafter and therefore in the proceedings u/s 143(3) of the IT Act for the assessment year 2016-17 the return of income was accepted as it is by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the reason mentioned by CPC is factually incorrect & therefore in our considered opinion both the orders passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC are also not correct. Accordingly, in view of the above, we deem it appropriate to set- aside both the orders passed u/s 250 as well as u/s 154 of the IT Act by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to the file of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer with a direction to verify the fact of timely filing of income tax return from assessment year 2017-18 to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.638/PUN/2025 5 assessment Year 2020-21. Upon such verification, the Assessing Officer shall allow the benefit of brought forward losses of earlier years, as claimed by the assessee in the return of income for A.Y. 2021–22, in accordance with law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 08th day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 08th September, 2025. 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, “A” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "