RAMESH KONDIBA PATIL,PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2), PUNE

ITA 2065/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ramesh Kondiba Patil, the appellant, who contested the additions made to his income for the Assessment Year 2016-17 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Pune. The additions amounted to Rs.1,50,21,275, which the assessee challenged but failed to respond to the notices from the CIT(A), leading to the dismissal of his appeal. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the request for a fresh opportunity to present his case, decided to remit the matter back to the CIT(A) for a thorough re-examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784969 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 01-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINOD PAWAR
• Assessee Lawyers: PRAMOD S. SHINGTE
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause

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.2065/PUN/2025 Assessment Year 2016-17 Ramesh Kondiba Patil, Flat No.436, Raj Tower, D Wing, Santosh Nagar, Pune 411 046 Maharashtra PAN : AILPP5863F Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2016-17 is directed against the order dated 19.06.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi emanating out of Assessment Order dated 16.03.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by ld.CIT(A) which resulted into dismissal of the assessee’s appeal and ld.CIT(A) without dealing with merits of the case affirmed the action of the ld. Assessing Officer. He therefore prayed that one more opportunity may please be granted by remitting the Assessee by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Respondent by : Shri Vinod Pawar (Virtual) Date of hearing : 28.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 12.11.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2065/PUN/2025 Ramesh Kondiba Patil 2 issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. 3. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative supported the order of ld.CIT(A). 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessee is an individual and assessment for A.Y. 2016-17 dated 16.03.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act wherein couple of additions made at Rs.1,38,21,275 and Rs.12,00,000/- assessing the income at Rs.1,50,21,275/-. Assessee challenged these additions before ld.CIT(A) but then failed to respond to the notices issued on various dates referred in para 5 of the impugned order. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has prayed for granting one more opportunity as the assessee could not respond to the notices for the reasons beyond control of the assessee. 5. Under the given facts and circumstances, considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and adopting justice oriented approach, we deem it to afford one more opportunity to the assessee. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues raised in the instant appeal are remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that in the set aside proceedings ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2065/PUN/2025 Ramesh Kondiba Patil 3 merits even in an exparte order. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 12th day of November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 12th November, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Assessee. 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. Printed from counselvise.com "