PER R.S.SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-13, Pune on 18-02-2019 in relation to the assessment year 2010-11.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return declaring total income at Rs.11, 60,360/-. Intimation u/s.143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Appellant by Shri Kihor Phadke Respondent by Shri Vishwas Munde Date of hearing 25-07-2019 Date of pronouncement 26-07-2019 ITA No.674/PUN/2019 Synergy Valuers & Project Consultant Pvt. Ltd. 2 Act) was issued in which the Assessing Officer (AO) did not grant credit for TDS amounting to Rs.2,08,790/- as the said amount was not appearing in Form No.26AS. The assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) which was time barred. As the assessee, in the opinion of the ld. CIT(A), could not justify the delay of five years in presenting the appeal before him, he refused to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal in limine.

3. I have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. The assessee received certain amount from LIC Housing Finance Ltd. and recorded it in its books of account. The TDS certificate was stated to have been inadvertently issued in the name of Shri Jitendra Prabhakar Paithankar, one of the directors of the assessee company instead of the assessee itself. The assessee offered the income and claimed the benefit of TDS, which was not allowed by the AO on the ground that it was not appearing in Form No.26AS. The ld. AR contended that the TDS certificate was inadvertently issued in the name of the director of the assessee company, who also did not claim the benefit of such TDS. Prima-facie, it appears that the benefit of TDS has been denied due to some ITA No.674/PUN/2019 Synergy Valuers & Project Consultant Pvt. Ltd. 3 mistake in issuing TDS certificate in the name of Shri Jitendra Prabhakar Paithankar, a director of the assessee company. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am of the considered opinion that the assessee has a good case on merits subject to verification of the factual aspects. In this backdrop of the factual scenario, I condone the delay in presenting the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The impugned order is, therefore, set-aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld. first appellate authority for disposal of appeal on merits.

4. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 26 th July, 2019. Sd/- (R.S.SYAL)    / VICE PRESIDENT Pune;
Dated : 26 th July, 2019 ITA No.674/PUN/2019 Synergy Valuers & Project Consultant Pvt. Ltd. 4         / Copy of the Order is forwarded to : 1. / The Appellant; 2.  / The Respondent; 3. () / The CIT (Appeals)-13, Pune

4. The Pr.CIT- 3, Pune 5. , , SMC / DR SMC, ITAT, Pune; 6.  / Guard file. // True copy // / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary , / ITAT, Pune Date

1. Draft dictated on 25-07-2019 Sr.PS

2. Draft placed before author 25-07-2019 Sr.PS

3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member -- JM

4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. -- JM

5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS

6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS

7. Date of uploading order Sr.PS

8. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS

9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk

10. Date on which file goes to the A.R.

11. Date of dispatch of Order. *