Case Law Details
Babai Krushana Ghule Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
The ITAT Pune considered an appeal against the order dated 20.03.2025 passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC for AY 2013-14. The Tribunal first condoned a delay of 233 days in filing the appeal after being satisfied that the assessee had shown sufficient cause, supported by an affidavit. The assessment had been reopened under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act after the assessee, along with four others, entered into a joint development agreement for a property at Satara with a total consideration of ₹3,32,01,500, comprising cash and built-up area. Since no capital gain was declared, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 by determining total income at ₹54,91,410 against the returned income of ₹1,66,667, including an addition of ₹53,24,743 towards long-term capital gain.
The CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the assessee’s appeal for want of prosecution due to the assessee’s absence. Before the Tribunal, it was submitted that the appeal could not be prosecuted due to the sudden demise of the assessee’s erstwhile counsel. Considering the facts and in the interest of justice, without examining the merits, the ITAT set aside the CIT(A)/NFAC’s order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The assessee was directed to respond to notices and produce relevant documents without seeking adjournments. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.03.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2013-14.
2. There is delay of 233 days in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay of 233 days and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and along with four persons found to have entered into a joint Development Agreement with M/s. Shriraj Vastu Nirmit for development of property situated at Satara for a total consideration of Rs.3,32,01,500/- which included cash and built up area. However, no capital gain was declared by the assessee, therefore, the case was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act and vide order dated 19.12.2017 the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the IT Act by determining the income of Rs.54,91,410/- as against the income of Rs.1,66,667/- returned by the assessee. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.53,24,743/- being addition on account of long term capital gain.
4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution.
5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
6. We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, it was submitted that due to sudden demise of erstwhile counsel, Late Shri Kulkarni, who was looking after the matter, the appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. Therefore, it was the sole contention of counsel of the assessee that one opportunity may kindly be provided to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC.
7. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and restore the matter back to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and to produce relevant documents, evidences and submissions, if any, in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 13th day of May, 2026.
Author Bio
