VENKATESHWARA B V BIOCORP PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE V. CIRCLE 12, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 2759/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Venkateshwara B V Biocorp Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2022-23. The primary issue was the non-condonation of a two-day delay in filing an appeal against the initial order, which the assessee argued was only a one-day delay due to technical glitches in the e-filing portal. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine due to this delay. The ITAT, referencing judgments from the Hon'ble Apex Court, found reasonable cause for the delay and condoned it, subsequently remitting the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on the merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829914 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Pune
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2025
• 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: AVIYOGI AMBADKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: NIKHIL S PATHAK
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.2759/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year 2022-2023) Venkateshwara B V Biocorp Pvt. Ltd., Venkateshwara House, S.No. 114/A/2, Pune City, S.P. College S.O., Pune Maharashtra PAN : AABCB 8390 C vs. DCIT, Circle-12, Pune (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Nikhil S Pathak, AR For Revenue : Shri Aviyogi Ambadkar, Addl.CIT Date of Hearing : 12.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 13.01.2026 ORDER PER : MANISH BORAD, AM This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of ADDL/JCIT (Appeals)-7, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] dated 24/09/2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”) which is arising out of order passed u/s. 143(1) of the Act dated 27.11.2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld.CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of 02 days in filing Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA.No.2759/PUN./2025 (Venkateshwara B V Biocorp Pvt. Ltd.) the appeal. He also submitted that the delay is only one day and that too on account of technical glitches, but in spite of reasonable cause mentioned in the application for condonation of delay filed before the Ld.CIT(A), delay in filing the appeal has not been condoned and the appeal has been dismissed in limine. He prayed for affording one more opportunity to go before the Ld. CIT(A). 3. Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not oppose the request of learned counsel for the assessee. 4. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a private limited and the return of income for A.Y. 2022-23 e-filed on 29.11.2022 and the same has been processed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act, dated 27.11.2023 after making certain adjustments/ additions in the hands of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with the order passed u/s. 143(1)(a) of the Act, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) on 28.12.2023 and the same was delayed by 02 days as per Ld.CIT(A) whereas the assessee demonstrated that delay is only one day, that also due to technical glitches in e-filing portal. We find that reasonable cause prevented the assessee from filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) within the prescribed time limit and that the delay is not intentional and therefore adopting a justice oriented approach and also taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA.No.2759/PUN./2025 (Venkateshwara B V Biocorp Pvt. Ltd.) case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [(1987) 2 SCC 107] and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), we hereby condone the delay in filing of appeal before Ld.CIT(A). 6. So far as merits of the cases are concerned, ideally the matter deserves to be restored to the file of Ld.CIT(A) as the issues on merits have not been dealt with by the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, we deem it appropriate to remit back the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to mention that Ld.CIT(A) shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and then decide the issues in accordance with law and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 13.01.2026 Sd/- Sd/- [ASTHA CHANDRA] [MANISH BORAD] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Pune, Dated 13th January, 2026 Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA.No.2759/PUN./2025 (Venkateshwara B V Biocorp Pvt. Ltd.) vr/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Ld. PCIT concerned. 4. D.R. ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. By Order //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "