SANJEEV YASHWANT BARTAKKE ,PUNE V. DCIT CIR-5, PUNE

ITA 3024/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke, the appellant, contesting an assessment order for the Assessment Year 2018-19, which was initially passed under sections 147 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention raised by the appellant was the failure to appear before the CIT(A) due to unavoidable circumstances, leading to a request for a re-hearing. The Tribunal noted the absence of objections from the Departmental Representative regarding this request and decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough examination of the issues raised, in line with judicial precedents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833666 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 10-12-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs. B.N.Bhattacharjeee (1977) 118 ITR 461, 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: VISHWAJIT SHINDE
• Assessee Lawyers: SUHAS P BORA
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.3024/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke, Flat No.803, Building C, Treasure Park, Santnagar, Parvati, Parvatigaon, Pune 411009, Maharashtra PAN : ACDPB2796F Vs. DCIT, Circle-5, Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 12.11.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Delhi (NFAC) passed u/s.250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 21.03.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act. 2. Though the assessee has raised as many as Nine grounds of appeal but the only contention of the ld. Counsel is that assessee for unavoidable circumstances failed to appear before ld.CIT(A) and therefore prayed for affording one more opportunity to go before ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication of the issues raised in the instant appeal. Assessee by : Shri Suhas P Bora Revenue by : Shri Vishwajit Shinde Date of hearing : 22.01.2026 Date of pronouncement : 03.02.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3024/PUN/2025 Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke 2 3. Ld. DR has not raised any objection to the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee. 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is an individual and assessment for A.Y. 2018-19 has been completed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act and against the returned income u/s.139(1) r.w.s. u/s.148 of the Act at Rs.25,57,780/- ld. AO has made addition of Rs.15,60,654/- thereof assessing the income at Rs.41,13,434/-. Assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but failed to appear on the dates of hearing fixed on 09.10.2024, 13.08.2025, 09.10.2025, 04.11.2025. Ld.CIT(A) accordingly following the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. B.N.Bhattacharjeee (1977) 118 ITR 461 dismissed the assessee’s appeal confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 5. I however note that ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case as assessee failed to appear and comply with the notices of hearing. I am of the considered opinion that in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties the issues raised in the instant appeal deserves to be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and after considering the submissions/evidences to be filed by the assessee shall 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). Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3024/PUN/2025 Sanjeev Yashwant Bartakke 3 department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds 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 03rd day of February, 2026. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ंक / Dated : 03rd February, 2026. Satish आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "