SIDHHIVINAYAK GRAMIN SAHKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,KOLHAPUR V. ITO, WARD-1(4), KOLHAPUR, KOLHAPUR

ITA 1536/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sidhhivinayak Gramin Sahkari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, a society based in Kodoli Panhala, Kolhapur, which appealed against the order of the CIT(A), Kolhapur. The appeal was directed against an ex-parte assessment order under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which included additions for unexplained money and estimated income. The ITAT noted the assessee's failure to respond to multiple notices during both the assessment and appellate proceedings, attributed to a lack of awareness and response from their tax consultant. Citing precedents from the Supreme Court, the ITAT condoned the delay in filing the appeal and decided to provide another opportunity for the assessee to present their case before the CIT(A).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 778741 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others, Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.Y. BALAWADE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"एस एम सी\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"SMC\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1536/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Sidhhivinayak Gramin Sahkari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, A/p Kodoli Panhala, Kolhapur-416231 Maharashtra PAN-AAEAS6278B Vs ITO, Ward-1(4) Kolhapur Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri R.Y. Balawade, Addl. CIT Date of hearing : 01.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 14.10.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), Kolhapur passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 23.12.2024 which is arising out of assessment order passed u/s 144 dated 09.12.2019. 2. Registry has informed that there is a delay of 111 days. After going through the application for condonation of delay and also considering the submissions of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR), Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.1536/PUN/2025 I find that the delay has arised on account of lack of response of the appointed Tax Consultant and also the assessee society lacked awareness of faceless assessment/appellate proceedings. I note that the delay is neither intentional nor deliberate and assessee would not have gained from delaying the appeal. Placing reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Master Katiji and Others(1987) 167 ITR 471(SC) (Supreme Court) and in the case of Inder Singh Vs State of Madhya Pradesh judgement dated 21.03.2025 (2025) INSC 382), I hereby condone the delay of 111 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. When the case called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee. With the assistance of Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) and perusal of the impugned order I find that the assessee failed to respond to the four notices of hearing sent on e-mail Id mentioned in Form No. 35. 4. I observe that the assessee is a Society and assessment for A.Y. 2017-18 has been framed ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act and addition for unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act at Rs. 3,00,000/- and also estimated income @ 8% of the gross receipts calculated at Rs. 9,93,849/-. Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) assessed the income at Rs. 12,93,850/-. I further observe that in the appellate proceedings before Ld. CIT(A) assessee had not responded on various notices of hearing. However considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, I deem it proper to provide one more opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly all the issues raised in the instant appeal are restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication to be carried out in accordance with law as Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.1536/PUN/2025 contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be given to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. 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 14th day of October, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक / Dated: 14th October, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"SMC\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"SMC\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "