SHAIKH ABID SHAIKH ZAHOOR L/H OF JAHUR KAMRUDDIN BHISTI,JALGAON V. ITO WARD 1(3), JALGAON

ITA 620/PUN/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the assessee, Shaik Abid Shaikh Zahoor, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which was passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act. The primary contention was the non-compliance to notices issued by the CIT(A), which the assessee argued was due to a reasonable cause and lack of receipt of the notices. Additionally, the assessee contested the additions made to his income for the assessment year 2011-12, totaling Rs. 14,73,109, Rs. 5,13,505, and Rs. 10,000 as unexplained income. The Tribunal noted procedural errors in the handling of the case, including the issuance of notices to an incorrect email address and the passing of the order in the name of a deceased person.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 314093 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VINOD PAWAR
• Assessee Lawyers: NIKHIL S PATHAK
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Non compliance

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.620/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shaik Abid Shaikh Zahoor L/h of Jahur Kamruddin Bhisti, Shop No.71, Ajintha Road, New Sabji Mandi, Jalgaon – 425003. Maharashtra. V s. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Jalgaon. PAN: AZUPS6315D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Nikhil S Pathak – AR Revenue by Shri Vinod Pawar – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 06/05/2025 Date of pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commssioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Act, dated 15.01.2025 for the A.Y.2011-12. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1] The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground that there was non-compliance on the part of the assessee to the various notices issued by him and thereby erred in confirming the various additions made by the learned A.Ο. ITA No.620/PUN/2025 [A] 2 2] The assessee submits that there was a reasonable cause on his part for the non-compliance to the notices issued by the learned CIT(A) and accordingly, request for one more opportunity to present its case before the learned CIT(A). 3] The assessee submits that he had not received the notices issued by the learned CIT(A) and hence, there was non compliance on his part to the notices issued by the learned CIT(A) as request for one more opportunity to present its case before the learned CIT(A). 4] The assessee submits that the addition made of Rs. 14,73,109/- is not justified and the same may kindly be deleted. 5] The assessee submits that the addition made of Rs. 5,13,505/ is not justified on the facts of the case and the same may kindly be deleted. 6] The assessee submits that the addition of Rs. 10,000/- as an unexplained income is not justified and the same may kindly be deleted. 71 The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” Submission of ld.AR : 2. Ld.AR for the Assessee filed a paper book. Ld.AR took us through the paper book, page no.3 and 4 to demonstrate that the notice issued by ld.CIT(A) was sent to the wrong email address. The email address mention in Form No.35 is “[e-mail]”. Ld.AR also submitted that hence, Assessee could not file submission before the ld.CIT(A). Ld.AR requested for one more opportunity. Ld.AR submitted that the Assessee “JAHUR KAMRUDDIN BHISTI” died on “20-10- 2022”. Mrs.JARINA BI JAHUR BHSITI was brought on record as Legal Heir of JAHUR KAMRUDDIN BHISTI. However, ITA No.620/PUN/2025 [A] 3 Mrs.JARINA BI JAHUR BHISTI died on “26-06-2024”. Ld.CIT(A) has passed order in the name of the deceased JAHUR KAMRUDDIN BHISTI on 15.01.2025, when Mr.JAHUR KAMRUDDIN BHISTI was already dead. Thus, ld.CIT(A) passed the order in the name of the deceased person. Ld.AR filed copies of the relevant Death Certificates. Submission of ld.DR : 3. Ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A). Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, ld.CIT(A) has passed the order dated 15.01.2025 in the name of deceased JAHUR KAMRUDDIN BHISTI. It is also observed that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-compliance. We have noted from the page number 3 and 4 of the paper book that notices issued by ld.CIT(A) were on incorrect email address. 4.1 In these facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of the justice we set-aside the order of the ld.CIT(A) to ld.CIT(A) for ITA No.620/PUN/2025 [A] 4 denovo adjudication. We direct the ld.CIT(A) to pass the order in the name Legal Heir of the deceased assessee JAHUR KAMRUDDIN BHISTI. The Legal Heir of the assessee shall file all the necessary details before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 07 May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (DIPAK P.RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 07 May, 2025/ SGR आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “बी” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune. "