SHRI AJINKYA MAHADEV KANCHAN,PUNE V. ITO WARD-43(3), PUNE

ITA 1675/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Ajinkya Mahadev Kanchan, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, which dismissed his appeal for non-compliance with hearing notices during the COVID-19 pandemic. The assessee argued that due to the pandemic and subsequent lockdowns, neither he nor his accountant could access the notices or comply with them, leading to an ex-parte decision. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument for a final opportunity to present his case, leading to the setting aside of the CIT(A)'s order and remanding the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 826657 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 18-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHARAT ANDHALE
• Assessee Lawyers: B.C. MALAKAR; YUVRAJ V. BHANDARE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1675/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shri Ajinkya Mahadev Kanchan, 45, Mahadev Niwas, Parivartan Society, Ashram Road, Urali Kanchan, Pune- 412202. PAN : BISPK4387D Vs. ITO, Ward-14(3), Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.09.2023 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. There is delay in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was Assessee by : Shri B. C. Malakar & Shri Yuvraj V. Bhandare Revenue by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of hearing : 04.12.2025 Date of pronouncement : 05.01.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1675/PUN/2025 2 prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 3. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred dismissing the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance to the notices of hearing issued by him during the appellant proceedings on 15/10/2019, 08/11/2019, 06/12/2019, 05/03/2020 and 15/01/2021 ignoring and without appreciating the facts that such notices had not been received/accessed by the appellant and/or by his CA & Accountant who had the access in assessee's e-filing portal having password and ID with him and such notices could not be accessed and replied due to closure of the offices for Covid-19 Pandemic during the said period and the declaration of Lockdown by the Government of India time and again during the said period and therefore question of compliance to the notices issued by the NFAC did not arise. The appellant therefore so passed ignoring the said facts and for non-compliance to the notices thereby dismissing the appeal of the appellant being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be quashed/set-aside. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred dismissing the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance to the notices of hearing issued by him during the appellant proceedings on 15/10/2019, 08/11/2019, 06/12/2019, 05/03/2020 and 15/01/2021 ignoring and without appreciating the facts that no such notices had been received by the appellant or by his CA/Accountant due to closure of the office of the CA/Accountant during the Covid-19 Pandemic in the said period of issuing notices and therefore the appellant had no occasion to interact with the CA/Accountant and comply to the notices even if the same had been received in appellant's e- filing portal where in the accessed to such portal was only with the said CA/Accountant since the appellant was totally ignorant about the operation of e-filing portal and was fully dependent on him for any response to any notice for income tax proceedings. The appellate order therefore so passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1675/PUN/2025 3 NFAC ignoring and without appreciating the above facts being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be quashed/set-aside. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant for non-compliance to the hearing notices issued u/s. 250 of the Act by him during the appellate proceedings merely quoting to the entire Assessment Order in the appellate order passed by him with grounds of appeal and statement of facts raised by the appellant without any application mind or giving any observation and findings in respect of the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant and without point wise discussion and analysis in the appellate order in violation of the provisions of section 250(6) of the IT Act, 1961 wherein it was categorically stated that the appeal was required to be disposed of \"in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision there on and the reason for the decision\". The appellate order therefore so passed by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC dismissing the appeal in violation of the said section being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in- law be quashed/set-aside. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant thereby merely referring to the statement of facts and grounds of appeal raised by the appellant in Form No. 35 in the said appellate order without addressing the issues raised in the grounds by the appellant and giving his specific findings as to why such grounds and contentions in the grounds raised were not acceptable to the CIT(A) and therefore such order passed by merely quoting the entire Assessment Order in appellate order in violation of principles of natural justice and further in violation of section 250(6) of the Act being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in- law be quashed/set-aside. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant and consequently confirming the various arbitrary additions made by the Ld. Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order ignoring and without properly appreciating the detailed submission made with documentary evidences during such assessment proceedings thereby only quoting the entire Assessment Order in the appellate order passed by him when such additions made by the Assessing Officer were not factually and legally justified in view of the facts of the case of the appellant. The appellate order therefore so passed thereby Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1675/PUN/2025 4 mechanically following the Assessment Order by the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC being arbitrary, illegal and bad-in-law be quashed/set- aside. 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete, amend, withdraw, modify, change or substitute any ground or grounds of appeal or to add any new ground or grounds of appeal during or before the hearing of the appeal.” 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and deriving income from agricultural activities and income from house property and has furnished its return of income on 17.07.2014 declaring total income of Rs.2,52,000/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) respectively were issued to the assessee. In response to the above notices, the assessee made part compliance and after considering the submissions of the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings and vide order dated 29.12.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act determined total income at Rs.4,14,76,460/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.2,52,000/- only. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.61,30,280/- u/s 56(2)(vii) of the IT Act and addition of Rs.76,00,000/- on account of unexplained investments and also an addition of Rs.2,74,94,181/- on account of capital gain on development/joint venture agreement. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1675/PUN/2025 5 5. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. 6. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 7. Ld. AR appearing from the side of the assessee submitted before us that the ex-part order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is not justified. Ld. AR further submitted that initially the hearing notices were issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC during covid period i.e. between 05.03.2020 and 15.01.2021 and final notice of hearing was issued for 08.09.2023. Ld. AR submitted that somehow the notice could not be seen by the counsel of the assessee and the hearing notice remained un-complied. Ld. AR submitted that the counsel of the assessee was having access to the income tax portal of the assessee and the assessee was not well versed with technology, therefore, in the absence of knowledge of notice of hearing the assessee could not reply before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC which resulted in ex-parte order. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the Bench to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and further requested to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1675/PUN/2025 6 provide one final opportunity to appear before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC so that the assessee can substantiate the grounds of appeal. 8. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. 9. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution without going into merits of the case. It is the sole prayer of the counsel of the assessee that if one final opportunity is provided to the assessee, he is in a position to substantiate grounds of appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and produce relevant Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1675/PUN/2025 7 documents/evidences, if any, in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 05th day of January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 05th January, 2026. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr.CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "