ABDULWAHID ABDULKARIM QURESHI,SANGAMNER V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR

ITA 2085/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Abdulwahid Abdulkarim Qureshi, the appellant, who contested a penalty imposed by the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 2, Ahmednagar, which was sustained by the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi. The penalty of Rs. 47,94,700 was levied for unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning an amount deposited in a cooperative credit society. The Tribunal referenced a prior decision where similar additions were deleted, leading to the conclusion that the penalty did not stand. Both parties acknowledged the Tribunal's previous decision, which favored the assessee by deleting the addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827532 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2025
• Other Referred Cases: ITA Nos.893 & 894/PUN/2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BASAVARAJ HIREM ATH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANKET JOSHI THROUGH VIRTUAL
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit; Co-operative Credit Society
• Section: 271(1)(c); 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2085/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2016-17 Abdulwahid Abdulkarim Qureshi Bharat Nagar, Sangamner, Ahmednagar – 422605 Vs. ITO, Ward 2, Ahmednagar PAN: AAIPQ9677R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Sanket Joshi (through virtual) Department by : Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 05-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 07-01-2026 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 21.02.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2016-17. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the penalty of Rs.47,94,700/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) 3. There is a delay of 128 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2085/PUN/2025 explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the condonation application filed along with the affidavit and after hearing the Ld. DR, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset filed a copy of the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 vide ITA Nos.893 & 894/PUN/2024 order dated 06.08.2025 and submitted that the addition made by the Assessing Officer has been deleted by the Tribunal. Therefore, the very basis on which the penalty has been levied by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC does not survive. 5. The Ld. DR on the other hand fairly conceded that the Tribunal has decided the appeal in favour of the assessee by deleting the addition. 6. After hearing both the sides, we find the Assessing Officer in the instant case levied penalty of Rs.47,94,700/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act being 100% of the tax sought to be evaded on the addition of Rs.1,38,31,394/- being the amount deposited by the assessee in the account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. treating the same as Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2085/PUN/2025 unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC sustained the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. 7. We find the Tribunal vide ITA Nos.893 & 894/PUN/2024 order dated 06.08.2025 for assessment years 2016-17 and 2017-18 has decided the issue and the addition made by the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2016-17 has been deleted. Since the very basis of the addition on which penalty has been levied u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act has already been deleted, therefore, the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC does not survive. Accordingly, the same is directed to be deleted. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 7th January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 7th January, 2026 GCVSR Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2085/PUN/2025 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 05.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 05.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Office Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "