NILESH HIMMATRAO PATIL,PUNE V. ITO WARD 6(2), PUNE

ITA 1586/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Nilesh Himmatrao Patil against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which had dismissed his earlier appeal concerning an assessment order for the assessment year 2012-13. The appellant had not filed a regular return of income, and subsequent investigations revealed substantial cash and time deposits, leading to a reassessment and addition of unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The NFAC dismissed the appeal on procedural grounds, stating that the notice for outstanding demand was not an appealable order. The ITAT found this approach to be hyper-technical and remitted the case back to the NFAC for a thorough examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 32536 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-10-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 07-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B. S. RAJPUROHIT
• Assessee Lawyers: SUHAS P. BORA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Bonafide belief; Recovery proceedings
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1586/PUN/2024 \u000bनधा\u000fरण वष\u000f / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Nilesh Himmatrao Patil, 301, Ujjwal Liberty, Lane No.30/31, Ganesh Nagar, Dhayari B.O., Pune 411 041 Maharashtra PAN : ARDPP6570E Vs. ITO, Ward-6(2), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the appellant directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 03.04.2024 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. At the outset, I find the appeal is time barred by limitation by 65 days before the Tribunal. The appellant had filed an affidavit praying for condonation of delay on the ground that the appellant was unaware of the ex parte proceedings before CIT(Appeal). It had come to his knowledge only when the recovery proceedings were initiated. Further, the notices and letters were served on the e-mail id of the former tax consultant. He was under the bonafide belief that the former tax consultant complied with all the notices. However, it was found that the former tax consultant did not take any action. After receiving the outstanding demand letter, the appellant thereafter approached another Chartered Accountant who took Assessee by : Shri Suhas P. Bora Revenue by : Shri B.S. Rajpurohit Date of hearing : 07.10.2024 Date of pronouncement : 09.10.2024 ITA No.1586/PUN/2024 2 steps in filing the required details before the CIT(A)/NFAC. Thus, there was reasonable cause for not preferring the appeal within the stipulated time. 3. I have gone through the averments made in the affidavit filed by the appellant. There was no material on record to disbelieve the aforementioned averments of the appellant. In the circumstances, I am of the view that this is a fit case to condone the delay. I therefore condone the delay of 65 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual, no regular return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 under the provisions of section 139(1) was filed. Based on the information in the NMS data that the appellant made cash deposit of Rs.20,80,000/- and time deposit of Rs.26,99,000/- with Vishweshwar Sahakari Bank Ltd. the Assessing Officer formed an opinion that income escaped assessment to tax. Accordingly, the case of the appellant was reopened u/s.147 of the Act and notice u/s.148 was issued to the appellant on 30.03.2019. Notice u/s.142(1) was issued to the appellant on 19.08.2019. Thereafter, show cause notice dated 08.11.2019 was issued to the appellant. The appellant neither complied with notice u/s.148 nor u/s.142(1). In the absence of any compliance from the side of appellant, the Assessing Officer issued summons u/s.133(6) to the Vishweshwar Sahakari Bank, Pune calling for the bank statement in respect of the transactions entered into by the appellant, reflected during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. Based on the information provided by the said bank, the AO vide order dated 29.11.2019 passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act completed the assessment, making addition of Rs.47,79,000/- u/s.69A as unexplained money. 5. Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal on the ITA No.1586/PUN/2024 3 ground that the appellant had filed the appeal against the notice for outstanding demand and has requested for condonation of delay. As the notice for outstanding demand against which the appeal is filed is not an order to be appealed against, the question of delay in filing of appeal does not arise. As such the delay is not condoned. 6. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal. 7. I heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. I had carefully perused the impugned order passed by the NFAC. The NFAC had merely dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appellant had not enclosed the assessment order but recovery demand notice issued by the AO. In my considered opinion, the NFAC ought to have notified this defect in filing the appeal and given reasonable time to the appellant to cure the defect. The approach adopted by the NFAC in the present case is hyper technical. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter is remitted back to the file of NFAC for denovo disposal of the appeal on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. I order accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant trust stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 09th day of October, 2024. Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 09th October, 2024. Satish ITA No.1586/PUN/2024 4 आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ\tेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\f / The Appellant. 2. \r\u000eयथ\f / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय \rितिनिध, 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. "