Shivraj Shankar Gundewadi Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Pune Bench has allowed an appeal filed by Shivraj Shankar Gundewadi, a petrol pump owner, for “statistical purposes,” citing a consultant’s lapse and the denial of a fair opportunity to the assessee. The case, involving an assessment year 2017-18, will now be re-examined by the Assessing Officer.
The assessee, proprietor of Matoshri Krushi Seva Kendra, engaged in a petrol pump business, faced reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2017-18. Despite valid statutory notices, the assessee reportedly failed to appear, leading to a best judgment assessment by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), National Faceless Assessment Centre (NFAC), Delhi. An addition of Rs. 12,53,560/- was made as unexplained money under Section 69 read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act.
The assessee subsequently filed an appeal with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, which was initially condoned despite a significant delay. However, the CIT(A)/NFAC also proceeded ex-parte due to non-compliance with hearing notices and lack of written submissions from the assessee, summarily dismissing the appeal without addressing its merits.
Before the ITAT, the assessee did not appear for the hearings. However, the Registry informed the tribunal that the appeal was delayed by 400 days. The assessee’s application for condonation of delay attributed the delay to a former consultant who, despite receiving the CIT(A) order on November 22, 2023, failed to inform the assessee and forwarded it to the current tax consultant only on February 21, 2025.
