PANKAJ CHANDRAKANT LADKAT,PUNE V. ITO, WARD-14(3), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1523/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Pankaj Chandrakant Ladkat, the appellant, who did not file an income tax return for the assessment year 2019-20. Following information about cash deposits, the Income Tax Officer (ITO) issued notices under sections 148 and 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but the assessee failed to respond. Consequently, the ITO made an addition of Rs. 3,65,72,600 under section 69A read with section 115BBE of the Act. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was initially dismissed due to a delay of 433 days in filing, which the CIT(A) did not condone. The assessee then appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, which decided to condone the delay and remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 714253 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHILESH SRIVASTVA
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEPA KHARE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"बी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"B\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1523/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2019-2020 Pankaj Chandrakant Ladkat, S No 211, Rupi Nagar, Bhekrainagar, Phursungi, S.O Fursungi, Pune- 412308 Maharashtra PAN-AGWPL9120G Vs ITO, Ward-14(3), Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 30.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 07.08.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, framed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 17.04.2025 for A.Y. 2019-20 framed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act dated 11.12.2023. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Id CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing appeal by not condoning the delay without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Id CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs 36572600/-without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or substitute any ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.1523/PUN/2025 3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that on account of delay in filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee’s appeal against the additions made by Ld. Assessing Officer AO u/s 69A of the Act has been dismissed in limine. Prayer made for condoning the delay and affording one more opportunity to go before Ld. CIT(A). 4. Ld. Departmental Representative supported the order of Ld. CIT(A). 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The assessee is an individual and did not file income Tax return for A.Y. 2019-20. Based on the information about cash deposits, assessee was served with valid statutory notice u/s 148 and 142(1) of the Act. The assessee still did not file the return. Ld. DR concluded the assessment proceedings making additions of Rs. 3,65,72,600/- u/s 69A r.w.s 115BBE of the Act. Aggrieved assessee filed the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 433 days. No proper reason for condonation of delay was filed before Ld. CIT(A) even before us. Prayer has been made for condoning the delay as the assessee was prevented for sufficient cause. Admittedly assessee has not participated in the impugned proceedings in spite of being provided sufficient opportunity but still in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties we condone the delay and restore the issue on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with the following directions:- a) Assessee has been served with the valid notices under section 148 and 142(1) of the Act. b) The assessee shall furnish the details for explaining the source of alleged cash deposits before Ld. CIT(A) c) Ld. CIT(A) shall not restore the issue on merits to the file of Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) but shall call for a remand report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO). Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.1523/PUN/2025 d) Ld. CIT(A) shall supply the remand report to the assessee and give due opportunity for rebultal. 6. After carrying out of the necessary directions referred above, Ld. CIT(A) shall pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised on merits by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 07th day of August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे /Pune; दििांक /Dated: 07th August, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि /Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी /The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी /The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"बी\" बेंच, पुणे /DR, ITAT, \"B\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल /Guard File. आिेशािुसार /BY ORDER, वररष्ठ धिजी सधचव /Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे /ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "