PRIYANKA NISHAD PAWAR ,THANE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 42 3 1 MUMBAI , MUMBAI

ITA 7494/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Priyanka Nishad Pawar against the orders passed by the NFAC, Delhi, for the assessment year 2016-17 under sections 147 and 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The appeals were initially dismissed ex parte by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) due to non-compliance by the assessee, which was later explained as unintentional and due to her unfamiliarity with electronic communication and procedural intricacies. The Tribunal found the assessee's reasons for delay and non-compliance genuine and not deliberate, leading to the decision to condone the delays and set aside the previous orders for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 824671 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ADESH RAI
• Assessee Lawyers: MANDAR VAIDYA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘SMC’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.7494/Mum/2025 & 5086/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year :2016-17) Priyanka Nishad Pawar 1903, E Wing, Laxmi Narayan Residency, Pokharan Road No.1 Thane-400 606 Vs. Assessing Officer, Assessment Unit, NFAC PAN/GIR No.AODPR1004G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Mandar Vaidya Revenue by Shri Adesh Rai, Sr. DR (Virtually) Date of Hearing 23/12/2025 Date of Pronouncement 29/12/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeals have been filed by the assessee against separate impugned orders of even dated 09/08/2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.147 / 143(3) for A.Y.2016-17. 2. At the outset, the appeal of the assessee is barred by limitation in ITA No. 5086/Mum/2025 there is a delay of 230 days and in ITA No. 7494/Mum/2025, there is a delay of 110 days, in support, assessee has filed following Affidavit. In ITA Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7494 & 5086/Mum/2025 Priyanka Nishad Pawar 2 No.7494/Mum/2025 and similar averment has been made in ITA No. 5086/Mum/2025. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7494 & 5086/Mum/2025 Priyanka Nishad Pawar 3 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7494 & 5086/Mum/2025 Priyanka Nishad Pawar 4 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7494 & 5086/Mum/2025 Priyanka Nishad Pawar 5 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7494 & 5086/Mum/2025 Priyanka Nishad Pawar 6 3. Having given our thoughtful consideration to the totality of the facts and circumstances placed on record, and bearing in mind the explanation tendered by the assessee, it is evident that the delay in preferring the present appeals has not arisen out of any deliberate inaction or contumacious conduct. The assessee, as stated, is not adequately conversant with electronic modes of communication and is also unfamiliar with the procedural intricacies of income tax proceedings conducted through digital platforms. On account of such genuine constraints, the assessee was unable to effectively respond to the statutory notices issued from time to time. In these circumstances, and being satisfied that sufficient cause within the meaning of law has been demonstrated, we are of the considered view that the delay deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, the delay of 230 days in ITA No. 5086/Mum/2025 and the delay of 110 days in ITA No. 7494/Mum/2025 are hereby condoned in the interest of substantial justice. 4. At the threshold, it is noticed that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeals ex parte on account of non-compliance by the assessee. However, the explanation placed before us indicates that such non-compliance was not wilful but stemmed from the assessee’s limited familiarity with electronic communication and the procedural framework governing appellate proceedings under the Act. In our considered opinion, the ends of justice would be better served if the assessee is afforded one more effective opportunity to present her case. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.7494 & 5086/Mum/2025 Priyanka Nishad Pawar 7 The appellate process is intended to advance justice and not to defeat it on mere technicalities. Therefore, in the interest of fairness and adherence to the principles of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned orders and restore the matters to the file of the learned CIT(A), who shall adjudicate the appeals afresh, in accordance with law, after granting due and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee for both the assessment years. 5. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 29th December, 2025. Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 29/12/2025 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "