VAIDEHI SHASHANK KARADE,PUNE V. ITO WARD-5 PANVEL, PANVEL

ITA 2100/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vaidehi Shashank Karande, the appellant, who contested the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which had dismissed her appeal as barred by limitation. The original assessment order was passed ex parte under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-compliance and non-service of notice to the assessee. The appellant argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to the absence of proper notice on the ITBA portal and email, leading to a 268-day delay. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's arguments, noting the lack of proper service of notice and the technical issues with the ITBA portal, and thus condoned the delay and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination of the issues.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 782641 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 08-09-2025
• 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: Reasonable cause; Non compliance

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.2100/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Vaidehi Shashank Karande, 10, Pratiksha, Shri Ram Nagar, Near Chetak Ghoda, Jawahar Colony, Aurangabad – 431 005 Maharashtra PAN : DETPK7189J Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Panvel Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is against the order dated 18.07.2025 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 emanating from Assessment Order dated 25.01.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act. 2. Though the assessee has raised as many as 10 Grounds of appeal but one of the grievance is that ld.CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay of 268 days and dismissed the appeal in limine being barred by limitation. He submitted that the assessment order has been passed exparte u/s.144 of the Act and no notice was served on the assessee on the e- mail registered on the ITBA portal. Even the assessment Appellant by : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Respondent by : Shri Bharat Andhale Date of hearing : 06.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 27.10.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2100/PUN/2025 Vaidehi Sahshank Karande 2 order also was not served on the portal also and shown with e-mail id as blank which indicates that no notice has been issued on the income-tax portal. Assessee came to know about the passing of the assessment order only on receiving the demand notice dated 23.10.2024. Even the physical address mentioned in the assessment order also is vague. These reasons gave rise to the delay of 268 days in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A). He submitted that since the assessee had reasonable cause for delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) the same deserves to be condoned in light of the settled judicial precedents and the issues raised in the instant appeal deserves to be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A). 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for A.Y. 2015-16. Based on the information about sale of immovable property, ld. Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.148 of the Act followed by carrying out of the re-assessment proceedings. However, due to non compliance by the assessee ld. AO concluded the re-assessment proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act and passed the best judgment assessment making addition of Rs.1,13,34,600/-. Assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) on 18.11.2024 and there was delay of 268 days. Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine by not condoning the delay. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2100/PUN/2025 Vaidehi Sahshank Karande 3 5. On perusal of Form No.35 and other details placed by the assessee in the paper book, we find that the assessee was not served with valid notice of hearing as well as passing of the assessment order on the registered e-mail id. Assessee came to know about the passing of the assessment order only after receiving the demand notice dated 24.10.2024. We notice that in this era of serving of notice through e-mail id and the information available on the income-tax portal in many cases assessees are not well versed with this new technical advancement and sometimes e-mails received from the income-tax departments goes unnoticed. In the instant case, assessee has stated that in place of e-mail mentioned on the income tax portal for serving the notice/assessment order the column is blank and the e-mail id registered on the income tax portal of the assessee is not mentioned in the communication of sending the assessment order. Considering all these aspects and also observing that the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) is not intentional and assessee would not have gained by delaying the filing. We therefore 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 268 days in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A). However, since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in Form No.35, we hereby remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication to be carried out after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Impugned order is set Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2100/PUN/2025 Vaidehi Sahshank Karande 4 aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 27th day of October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 27th 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 "