RAVINDRA BABANRAO KASAR,PUNE V. ITO, WARD-7(3), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 2634/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ravindra Babanrao Kasar, the appellant, who did not file a return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18. Based on specific information under the Risk Management Strategy, a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act was issued to him. Due to non-compliance, a Best Judgment assessment was made under sections 147, 144, and 144B, assessing his income at Rs.2,36,91,279. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine ex parte, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal considered the circumstances of non-compliance and the legal precedents, deciding to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826318 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 06-11-2025
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay), B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another vs. 118 ITR 461
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY DHIVARE
• Assessee Lawyers: DEEPA KHARE
• 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.2634/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Ravindra Babanrao Kasar, Flat No.1102, B-340/1A, 2A, Tuscan Estate, Kharadi By Pass Road, Kharadi, Pune 411014 Maharashtra PAN : ALHPK2688L Vs. ITO, Ward-7(3), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BOARD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 29.09.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 13.02.2025 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine exparte relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B.N. Bhattacharjee and Another reported in 118 ITR 461. Assessee could not comply with the notices due to the circumstances which were beyond control of the assessee. It Appellant by : Smt. Deepa Khare Respondent by : Shri Sanjay Dhivare (Through Virtual) Date of hearing : 22.12.2025 Date of pronouncement : 06.01.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2634/PUN/2025 Ravindra Babanrao Kasar 2 is therefore prayed for granting one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case on merits. 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 observe that the assessee is an individual and did not file return of income for A.Y. 2017-18. Based on the specific information as per the Risk Management Strategy assessee was issued notice u/s.148 of the Act but thereafter due to non-compliance Best Judgment assessment has been framed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act making various additions and assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.2,36,91,279/-. Assessee challenged the additions before ld.CIT(A) raising various legal issues as well as issues on merit but subsequently failed to appear on the given dates of hearing on 08.07.2025, 19.08.2025, 27.08.2025 and 17.09.2025. We have considered the totality of the facts and circumstances and prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and deem it appropriate to remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication 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 merits even in an exparte order. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2634/PUN/2025 Ravindra Babanrao Kasar 3 remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 06th day of January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 06th January, 2026. 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 // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "