TANGMARG INVESTMENT AND TRADING PVT.LTD,PUNE V. ACIT, CIRCLE-7, PUNE

ITA 1878/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Tangmarg Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against an order from the Addl/JCIT(A), Udaipur, related to the Assessment Year 2017-18. The original assessment was made under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, resulting in various additions totaling Rs.76,86,180. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was initially dismissed due to a delay in filing, which was later condoned by the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that the assessee had reasonable cause for the delay and did not gain from it, thus admitting the appeal for adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785893 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 06-08-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BHARAT ANDHALE
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHOR B PHADKE
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Period of limitation; Time period of passing order
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1878/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Tangmarg Investment and Trading Pvt. Ltd., B and C Wing, First Floor, Shangrila Garden, Pune H.O., Haveli, Pune 411001, Maharashtra PAN : AAACT7585L Vs. ACIT, Circle-7, Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 08.11.2024 framed by Addl/JCIT(A), Udaipur emanating out of Assessment Order dated 24.12.2019 passed u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 187 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the delay. 3. On perusing the averments made in the Affidavit, we are satisfied that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee to file the appeal within the stipulated time. We note that the delay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from Appellant by : Shri Kishor B Phadke Respondent by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of hearing : 08.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.10.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1878/PUN/2025 Tangmarg Investment & Trading Pvt. Ltd. 2 filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore taking justice oriented approach and taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 187 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with merits of the case since the delay in filing of the appeal before ld.CIT(A) has not been condoned and the appeal has been dismissed in limine and not found in conformity with the provisions of section 249(2) of the Act. He submitted that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee from filing an appeal before ld.CIT(A) in the prescribed time limit. He therefore prayed that delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) may please be condoned and the matter may be restored to the ld.CIT(A) by granting one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication on merits. 5. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A). 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a Private Limited Company and nil income declared in the return for A.Y.2017-18 on 24.10.2017 along with carry forward of claim of business losses at Rs.1,25,48,919/-. After the case being selected for scrutiny by CASS followed by validly serving statutory notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1878/PUN/2025 Tangmarg Investment & Trading Pvt. Ltd. 3 Act ld. Assessing Officer carried out the assessment proceedings. However, the assessee failed to respond to the notices issued by ld. AO leaving no option for ld.AO to conclude the proceedings as Best Judgment Assessment u/s.144 of the Act on 24.12.2019 making various additions totalling to Rs.76,86,180/-. However, ld. AO gave benefit of forward of brought forward losses and the remaining amount of losses to be carried forward has been calculated at Rs.48,62,739/-. Assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but the same was filed on 21.02.2023 and after the exclusion of limitation period due to covid-19 pandemic period by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Cognizance for Extension of Limitation In re (2022) 441 ITR 722 (SC), still there was delay of approximately 11 months. We find that assessee has not gained by delaying the filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) and therefore in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties we condone the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A). So far as merits of the case are concerned, we deem it appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. In view therefore, without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues raised in the instant appeal are remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A). Needless to mention that in the set aside proceedings Ld CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee to file necessary details. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1878/PUN/2025 Tangmarg Investment & Trading Pvt. Ltd. 4 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 29th day of October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 29th October, 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\u0014च, 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. Printed from counselvise.com "