SUNIL VILAS BHOSALE,SANGLI V. ITO WARD 1, SANGLI

ITA 2675/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Sunil Vilas Bhosale, the proprietor of Hotel Rachana, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which was initially based on an assessment order for the year 2018-19. The assessment had made a significant addition to the assessee's income under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, amounting to Rs. 2,74,05,450. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine due to a delay of 87 days in filing, attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic. The ITAT found that the delay should be condoned considering the extraordinary circumstances and the Supreme Court's decision in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation In re, which had extended limitation periods due to the pandemic.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312455 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation In re (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARVIND DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: SACHIN P. KUMAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Period of limitation; Time period of passing order
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2675/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Sunil Vilas Bhosale, Hotel Rachana, MIDC Kupwad, Sangli – 416436 Maharashtra PAN : AMGPB9327B Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sangli Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to assessment year 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 16.10.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment order dated 09.04.2021 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act. 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine being barred by limitation on account of delay of 87 days in filing of the appeal. He stated that the delay was on account of covid-19 pandemic prevailed across the country and therefore prayed for remitting the issues on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Appellant by : Shri Sachin P. Kumar Respondent by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 13.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 30.04.2025 ITA No.2675/PUN/2024 Sunil Vilas Bhosale 2 3. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the assessment order in the case of assessee for A.Y. 2018-19 was framed u/s.143(3) of the Act on 09.04.2021 assessing the income at Rs.2,85,30,910/- wherein addition of Rs.2,74,05,450/- was made invoking the provisions of section 68 of the Act. Assessee filed an appeal before ld.CIT(A) assailing the order of the AO but there was delay of 87 days. Such delay of 87 days ought to have been condoned by the ld.CIT(A), as at that point of time, country was passing through covid-19 pandemic and restrictions were put in and almost two years period have been removed out of the limitation period by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation In re (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC). Apparently, it seems that ld.CIT(A) has not taken cognizance of this aspect and has dismissed the appeal by not admitting it on account of delay of 87 days, We therefore under the facts and circumstances of the case condone the delay of 87 days and remit the issues raised to the file of ld.CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the matter on merits and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act for which a reasonable opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide correct email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is further directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of ld.CIT(A) is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No.2675/PUN/2024 Sunil Vilas Bhosale 3 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 30th day of April, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 30th April, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब\u0013च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "