RAMESH PANJWANI, DHAMTARI,DHAMTARI V. ITO, DHAMTARI, DHAMTARI

ITA 89/RPR/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Ramesh Panjwani, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, which was initially passed ex-parte due to non-compliance by the assessee. The appellant faced a delay of 64 days in filing the appeal, which was later condoned by the Tribunal after considering the circumstances and supporting documents. The Tribunal noted that the notices and appellate order were sent to the previous tax consultant's email, leading to the delay in the appellant's awareness. The Tribunal, referencing several judicial precedents, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(Appeals)/NFAC for a fresh examination on merits, providing the appellant a final opportunity to comply with the hearing notices.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839558 (ITAT-RAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 02-02-2026
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors, Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Raipur, Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Brajesh Singh Bhadoria Vs. Dy./ACIT, Central Circle-2, Naya Raipur
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRIYANKA PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: PUJA BAJAJ
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; TDS
• Section: 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण Ûयायपीठ “एक-सदèय” मामला रायपुर मɅ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH “SMC”, RAIPUR Įी पाथ[ सारथी चौधरȣ, ÛयाǓयक सदèय क े सम¢ BEFORE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.89/RPR/2026 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Ramesh Panjwani C/o. Shubham Vastralaya, Shastri Chowk, Dhamtari (C.G.)- 493 773 PAN: AEPPP7560K .......अपीलाथȸ / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-Dhamtari (C.G.) ……Ĥ×यथȸ / Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Puja Bajaj, CA Revenue by : Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख / Date of Hearing : 24.02.2026 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख / Date of Pronouncement : 24.02.2026 Printed from counselvise.com 2 Ramesh Panjwani Vs. ITO, Dhamtari (C.G.) ITA No.89/RPR/2026 आदेश / ORDER PER PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM The present appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi dated 19.09.2025 for the assessment year 2014-15 as per the grounds of appeal on record. 2. At the very outset, it is noted that there is delay of 64 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal. That explaining the reasons for such delay and praying for condonation of the same, the assessee had filed condonation petition a/w. affidavit, dated 10.02.2026. The relevant contents of the said affidavit are extracted as follows: Printed from counselvise.com 3 Ramesh Panjwani Vs. ITO, Dhamtari (C.G.) ITA No.89/RPR/2026 3. I have carefully perused the contents of the affidavit and condonation petition and heard the submissions of the parties herein. In my considered view, there is no deliberate or malafide conduct on the part of the assessee, if any, for late filing of this appeal. That as evident from the supporting documents placed on record, the notice and the appellate order were sent to the email id of the erstwhile tax consultant of the assessee. The fact of the matter is that the assessee came to know about the said delay of 64 days only from the present counsel when issue letter for penalty notice u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act was received in the email id of the present counsel. These facts are emanating from the relevant documents placed on record which have been annexed a/w. the affidavit. Considering the ratio laid down in the judicial pronouncements viz. (i) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors, reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC); (ii) Vidya Shankar Jaiswal Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Civil Appeal Nos……………../2025 [Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. Printed from counselvise.com 4 Ramesh Panjwani Vs. ITO, Dhamtari (C.G.) ITA No.89/RPR/2026 26310-26311/2024, dated 31.01.2025; (iii) Jagdish Prasad Singhania Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Raipur (C.G.), TAX Case No.17/2025, dated 24.02.2025 and (iv) Inder Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh, Civil Appeal No…………/2025, Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6145 of 2024, dated 21st March, 2025, I hereby condone the delay of 64 days involved in the present appeal and the matter is heard on merits. 4. That so far as merits of the matter are concerned, it is noted that an ex-parte order has been passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC due to non- compliance by the assessee. It was submitted by the Ld. Counsel that one final opportunity may be provided to the assessee in the interest of principles of natural justice and the matter may be remanded to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC so that the assessee can represent the matter on merits. The relevant para of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC regarding ex- parte order is extracted as follows: “4(a). Subsequently, during the pendency of appeal, appellant was issued various notices of hearing u/s. 250 of the I.T Act dated 01.03.2025 (Enablement of Communication hearing notice), 17.07.2025, 07.08.2025, 13.08.2025 and latest hearing notice dated 11.09.2025 posting the appeal for hearing/filing submissions on or before 16.09.2025. For all these hearing notices, appellant could not make any submissions in spite of availing sufficient time and opportunities. From the fact of appellant's non-response to various notices, it is clear that apparently, appellant has no specific submissions to file to pursue the pending appeal and accordingly, appellant's appeal needs to be considered as per the facts available on record and on merits. As appellant failed to avail the opportunities offered on various occasions Printed from counselvise.com 5 Ramesh Panjwani Vs. ITO, Dhamtari (C.G.) ITA No.89/RPR/2026 from time to time, it is understood that appellant is not keen to pursue the appeal as per law and accordingly, appeal filed by the appellant is liable to be dismissed for non-prosecution by the appellant. The following citations/decisions of Hon'ble Adjudicating Authorities clearly envisage for dismissal of appellant's appeal on appellant's failure to prosecute/pursue the pending appeal in spite of availing sufficient time and opportunities accordingly, appellant's appeal is not maintainable.” 5. The Ld. Sr. DR has fairly conceded that the matter may be adjudicated denovo on merits before the first appellate authority providing one final opportunity to the assessee. 6. That since as per the factual spectrum and that an ex-parte order has been passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC as there was no compliance from the assessee, in such scenario, in the interest of principles of natural justice, I follow the ratio laid down by the ITAT, “Division Bench”, Raipur in the cases of Brajesh Singh Bhadoria Vs. Dy./ACIT, Central Circle-2, Naya Raipur, IT(SS)A Nos. 1 to 6, 8 & 9/RPR/2025, dated 20.03.2025 wherein the Tribunal had dealt with similar issue on the same parameters of ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remanded the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. Accordingly, on same parity of reasoning and on similar terms, I set-aside the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals)/NFAC and remand the matter back to its file for denovo adjudication while complying with the principles of natural justice. At the same time, it is directed that Printed from counselvise.com 6 Ramesh Panjwani Vs. ITO, Dhamtari (C.G.) ITA No.89/RPR/2026 this being the final opportunity, the assessee shall duly comply with the hearing notices from the Ld.CIT(Appeals)/NFAC. 7. As per the aforesaid terms, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 24th day of February, 2026. Sd/- (PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY) ÛयाǓयक सदèय/JUDICIAL MEMBER रायपुर / Raipur; Ǒदनांक / Dated : 24th February, 2026. SB, Sr. PS आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant. 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT-1, Raipur (C.G.) 4. ͪवभागीय ĤǓतǓनͬध, आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, “एक-सदèय” बɅच, रायपुर / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Raipur. 5. गाड[ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, रायपुर / ITAT, Raipur Printed from counselvise.com "