AKASH PRAKASH SUTSONKAR,PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE

ITA 1845/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Akash Prakash Sutsonkar, a distributor for Idea Cellular Limited, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from an assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee's appeal was initially dismissed by the CIT(A) due to a significant delay in filing. The primary issue was the addition of Rs. 50,54,393 as unexplained cash credit following a scrutiny of the assessee's bank deposits. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and documents, which included bank statements and a distributor agreement, suggesting a legitimate business operation. Consequently, the Tribunal remanded the case for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing and consideration of all evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840372 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 01-08-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UDOL RAJ SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: AJINKYA M
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 143(3); 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1845/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Akash Prakash Sutsonkar, 98/99, Guruwar Peth, Near Jain Mandir, Pune 411002, Maharashtra PAN : BUGPS5158A Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3), Pune Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 04.07.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 09.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine by not condoning the delay. He further submitted that the assesssee is a distributor appointed by Idea Cellular Limited and the alleged cash deposit is a Revenue from sale of recharge vouchers both retail and wholesale & sale of SIM cards and the payments have been made to the Idea Cellular Limited. He further submitted that even before ld.CIT(A) sufficient details could not be furnished therefore prayed for granting one more opportunity Appellant by : Shri Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan Respondent by : Shri Udol Raj Singh Date of hearing : 18.02.2026 Date of pronouncement : 23.02.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1845/PUN/2025 Akash Prakash Sutsonkar 2 to go before ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for necessary adjudication of the issues on merits. 3. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A). 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and filed the return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 22.03.2018 declaring income of Rs.2,02,520/-. On the basis of information about cash deposit of Rs.50,54,393/- in Bank of Maharashtra, Guruwar Peth branch, case of the assessee selected for scrutiny and valid notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) served. However, assessee failed to respond to the notices of hearing issued by the ld. Assessing Officer as a result of which Best Judgment assessment u/s.144 of the Act framed by the ld. Assessing Officer making addition for unexplained cash credit of Rs.50,54,393/- thereby assessing income at Rs.52,56,910/-. 5. Aggrieved with the addition made by the ld. Assessing Officer assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but with a delay of 1802 days. Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without condoning the delay. 6. We however going through the application for condonation observe that at the relevant time, assessee’s mother was critically ill and from March 2020 to March 2022 covid-19 pandemic outbreak prevailed across the country. Finding them to be sufficient ‘reasonable cause’ which gave rise to the delay in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) and placing Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1845/PUN/2025 Akash Prakash Sutsonkar 3 reliance on the 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 1802 days before ld.CIT(A) and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. So far as merits of the case are concerned, assessee has furnished the paper book running into 49 pages which includes bank statements, copy of Prepaid Distributor Agreement between Idea Cellular Limited and assessee, bank transactions of assessee’s proprietorship concern M/s. Akash Enterprises exhibiting the details of cash deposit and the consistent payment to Idea Cellular Limited through banking channel. The above documents shows that the assessee has a prima-facie case to plead on merits against the additions made in his hands. We therefore in the larger interest of justice are of the view that it is a fit for remanding the issues to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits of the case, we direct the ld.JAO to carry out denovo assessment proceedings in accordance with law. Needless to mention that ld.JAO in the set aside proceeding shall provide reasonable opportunity to the asseseee and consider the documents/evidences (referred supra) to be filed by the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and make satisfactory compliance to the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.JAO and should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1845/PUN/2025 Akash Prakash Sutsonkar 4 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 23rd day of February, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 23rd February, 2026. Satish आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “A” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, / True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "