PURVA KHANDESH KUSHTHA SEWA MANDAL,BHUSAWAL V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD- 1(2), NASHIK, NASHIK

ITA 2845/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Purva Khandesh Kushtha Sewa Mandal, a trust, which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2016-17. The appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a delay of 147 days in filing, attributed to the hospitalization of the consultant's parents. The ITAT found this reason sufficient to condone the delay and proceeded to address the merits of the case. The primary issue was the ex-parte assessment by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) treating a cash deposit of Rs.2.18 crore as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the assessee's failure to file a return of income or respond to notices under sections 148 and 142(1). The ITAT, after hearing the arguments, decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination on merits, allowing the assessee another opportunity to present its case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 314362 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: Collector Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 SC, CIT vs. Sanmac Motor Finance Ltd. reported in 322 ITR 309
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: ROHIT S. TAPADIYA
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 144; 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2845/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Purva Khandesh Kushtha Sewa Mandal, Sanchalit Chaitanya Ayurved College, Sakegaon, Bhusawal – 425 201 Maharashtra PAN : AAATP9900G Vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-1(2), Nashik Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17 is directed against the order dated 15.10.2024 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’) which inturn is arising out of the Assessment Order dated 27.03.2022 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act. 2. At the outset, Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that in the instant case the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 147 days and the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay occurred before him. From perusal of the impugned, order, we notice that the reason Appellant by : Shri Rohit S. Tapadiya Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 04.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 06.05.2025 ITA No.2845/PUN/2024 Purva Khandesh Kushtha Sewa Mandal 2 stated by the assessee was that the consultant’s parents were critical and hospitalized and therefore the ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee could not make the requisite submissions even before the ld. Assessing Officer which led to passing of the order exparte u/s.144 of the Act. Therefore, a prayer is made to condone the delay. 3. After hearing both the sides and the facts which led to delay in presenting the appeal before the ld.CIT(A) we are of the view that non-representation by the Authorized Representative before the authorities should not be detrimental to the assessee. A liberal and pragmatic approach needs to be adopted in the instant case and in light of judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 SC and the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sanmac Motor Finance Ltd. reported in 322 ITR 309 where delay of 1876 days was condoned, we therefore condone the delay of 147 days and proceed for adjudication of the appeal. 4. Coming to the merits of the case, we notice that the assessee trust has not filed the return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act. Based on the information available with NMS and ITS data that the assessee has deposited cash of Rs.2.18 crore and interest income of Rs.45,165/-, the assessee’s case was reopened by way of issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act. As the assessee had failed to file return of income and other details as called for by the ld. AO in compliance to notices issues u/s.148/142(1) of the Act, ld. AO proceeded with the assessment on an ex-parte basis, and vide his order passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated ITA No.2845/PUN/2024 Purva Khandesh Kushtha Sewa Mandal 3 27.03.2022 treating the cash deposit of Rs.2.18 crore as unexplained money u/s.69A, assessed its income at Rs.2,18,46,990/-. Ld. AO while framing the assessment also initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 5. During the course of present hearing, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to the reasons beyond control of the assessee, its case was not represented before the lower authorities which led to passing of the orders exparte against the assessee. Given an opportunity, the assessee is now in a position to represent its case effectively before the authorities by producing cogent evidences. Therefore, a prayer is made to remit the issue on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A). Ld. Departmental Representative did not object for remission of the issues to the file of ld.CIT(A). 6. Having heard both the sides and perusing the record placed before us and the submissions made by the ld. counsel for the assessee during the course of present hearing, we are of the considered opinion that the end of justice would meet adequately if the issues on merit are remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Assessee is directed to provide proper email id and phone number to the department for receiving notices through ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to seek unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required, failing which the ld. ld.CIT(A) is at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Finding of ld.CIT(A) is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.2845/PUN/2024 Purva Khandesh Kushtha Sewa Mandal 4 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 06th day of May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 06th May, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "