VISHNU GANPAT GAIKWAD,RAIGAD V. ITO, WARD-1, PANVEL, PANVEL

ITA 2138/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vishnu Ganpat Gaikwad, the appellant, who contested an income tax assessment for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessment included significant disallowances and additions, leading to a higher assessed income compared to the returned income. The appellant's appeal to the ld.CIT(A) was initially dismissed as time-barred, prompting the filing of an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal examined the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal and the circumstances surrounding the assessment and subsequent legal challenges faced by the appellant, including disputes over enhanced compensation and legal entanglements involving multiple judicial forums.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 788128 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 15-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAMOD SHAHAKAR
• Assessee Lawyers: IVANNA HAZEL SOANS
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Reasonable cause; Period of limitation

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.2138/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vishnu Ganpat Gaikwad, 543, Ovala Pargaon, Panvel, Raigad, Maharashtra – 410206 PAN : AVCPG2975K Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Panvel Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BOARD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 21.10.2024 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 14.05.2023 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 rr.w.s.144B of the Act. 2. Registry has informed that there is delay of 258 days in filing the instant appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay and relevant part of the application reads as under : “8. It is also pertinent to mention that a substantial portion of the enhanced compensation of about Rs. 62 crores has been blocked in FDR since 2016 and not been disbursed to the Vahivatdars by order of Civil Judge Senior Division, Alibaug dated 29.06.2016, on account of challenge by the Special Land Acquisition Officer (the \"SLAO\") Appellant by : Ms. Ivanna Hazel Soans (Virtual) Respondent by : Shri Pramod Shahakar Date of hearing : 04.11.2025 Date of pronouncement : 27.11.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2138/PUN/2025 Vishnu Ganpat Gaikwad 2 before the Bombay High Court against the enhanced compensation, which is presently subjudice. 9. The Appellant along with the other Vahivatdars are agriculturists based in remote villages having limited education and limited access to legal assistance, and could not understand how to proceed further in this plethora of income tax orders and demands running into crores of rupees. 10. Apart from this, the whole matter of compensation award was mired in disputes and serious conflicts leading to escalation of proceedings before the Charity Commissioner, police inquiries, causing prolonged legal entanglement. Because of this the Vahivatdars had to file a Special Civil Suit No. 19106/2024 before the District Judge, Panvel, which remains pending.” 3. On perusing the averments made in the condonation application, 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 filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore in light of 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 258 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Though the assessee has raised various grounds of appeal, however, with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative we note that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal in limine being barred by limitation. Both the parties have raised no objection in case the delay before ld.CIT(A) is condoned and matter is restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits of the case. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2138/PUN/2025 Vishnu Ganpat Gaikwad 3 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We notice that the assessee is an individual and has been assessed for A.Y. 2017-18 u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act and against the returned income of Rs.7,68,760/- in the return filed on 30.03.2018 income has been assessed at Rs.1,64,02,354/- after making disallowance u/s.10(37) at Rs.1.40 crore and further addition for short admission of interest income at Rs.16,33,594/-. Assessee filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) on 11.09.2023 and the same was delayed by 78 days. Assessee has also filed an affidavit explaining the reason and the same is placed at pages 10 to 12 of the paper book. Relevant part of the affidavit reads as under : “3. That I had approached my previous chartered accountant (\"CA\") to file the said appeal which was already beyond the prescribed period of limitation. Due to the urgency, an inadvertent mistake occurred when \"No\" was selected in response to the question, \"Whether there is delay in filing appeal\". The same was an inadvertent clerical error. 4. That unfortunately, as a result of this unintentional lapse, the NFAC dismissed the appeal by passing order dt.21.10.2024 which is impugned in the present appeal, as time barred without adjudicating it on merits, thereby causing serious prejudice to me. 5. That the mistake in filling the Form 35 was an inadvertent mistake on the part of my previous CA and I ought not to be prejudiced for a genuine clerical mistake made in the course of filing by my authorized representative.” 6. We have gone through the above contents of the affidavit and also heard the ld. DR and are of the considered opinion that the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) is not intentional and since the assessee(s) are dependent upon Tax Consultants in filing of appeals and for any inadvertent mistake committed at the end of the consultants, assessee Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2138/PUN/2025 Vishnu Ganpat Gaikwad 4 should not suffer. We therefore following the judicial precedents on the issue of delay referred (supra) condone the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) as well. 7. Under these given facts and circumstances, we deem it appropriate to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) wherein it was held that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 27th day of November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 27th November, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2138/PUN/2025 Vishnu Ganpat Gaikwad 5 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 "