SHUBHANGI VIDYASAGAR CHAVAN,THANE V. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NA

ITA 2894/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shubhangi Vidyasagar Chavan, the assessee, who appealed against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2014-15. The appeal was initially delayed by 512 days, but the ITAT condoned the delay, emphasizing the importance of substantial justice over technicalities. The assessee was previously ex-parte before the CIT(A), and the ITAT, considering the circumstances, decided to restore the case to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing on merits, ensuring the assessee's rights were not prejudiced.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712197 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Land Acquisition Collector Vs MST Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353 Supreme Court
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAVIN CHAVAN
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2894/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shubhangi Vidyasagar Chavan Aadesh Bunglow, Bright Star Society, Yashsvi Nagar, Balkum, Thane – 400608. Vs. ITO – 2(1) Thane PAN/GIR No. AGXPC9519P (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Pravin Chavan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 20.02.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called, however an application for seeking adjournment is placed on record. From the case file, we noticed that assessee was ex-parte before Ld. CIT(A) Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 2894/Mum/2025 Shubhangi Vidyasagar Chavan., Mumbai therefore we dismiss the application for seeking adjournment. Contra, the Ld.DR present in the court is ready with the arguments. Therefore, we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte. 3. From the records we noticed that there is delay of 512 days in filing the present appeal, therefore after going through the contents of the application and also hearing Ld. DR and considering the entire factual position as noticed by us and also keeping in view the principles laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs MST Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353 Supreme Court, wherein it has been held that were substantial justice is pitted against technicalities of non-deliberate delay, then in that eventuality substantial justice is to be preferred. In our view the principals of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Hence considering the explanation put forth by the Assessee by justifiably and properly explaining the delay which occurred in filing the appeal and construing the expression \"sufficient cause\" liberally we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal before us. Therefore, we condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 2894/Mum/2025 Shubhangi Vidyasagar Chavan., Mumbai 4. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that assessee was ex-parte before Ld. CIT(A) and in case another opportunity is not granted to the assessee to contest its case on merits, then his rights would be prejudiced. Hence the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee. Since there was non cooperation on behalf of the assessee during the proceedings before the revenue authorities therefore a cost of Rs. 5,000/- on account of condonation of delay and also for non appearance before Ld. CIT(A) is imposed upon the assessee which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and a copy of the receipt shall be placed on file before AO within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 5. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 2894/Mum/2025 Shubhangi Vidyasagar Chavan., Mumbai on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 24/07/2025 KRK, Sr. PS आदेश की \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. \u000eथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0019 / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु\u0019(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स\u000eािपत ित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई / ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "