BHASAKAR KISANRAV GIRAM,JALNA V. ITO WARD 3, JALNA

ITA 1380/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Bhasakar Kisanrav Giram, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A) which affirmed the addition of Rs.19.00 lakh to his income for the Assessment Year 2012-13. This addition was based on the Assessing Officer's (AO) observation that only Rs.3.00 lakh was recorded in the sale deed of agricultural land, contrary to the Rs.31.00 lakh claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal noted that statements recorded under section 131 post-assessment were not considered by the CIT(A), which could potentially support the assessee's claim. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity for cross-examination regarding the statements of third parties, which was a crucial procedural lapse.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 782635 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 27-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJITESH MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHOR B. PHADKE
• Keywords: Set aside; Capital asset; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings; Opportunity of cross examination

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1380/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Bhasakar Kisanrav Giram, 1, Sindhi Kalegaon, Behind Jalna Railway Station, Jalna – 431 213 Maharashtra PAN : BVRPG9474K Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Jalna Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 21.03.2025 of Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Visakhapatnam emanating out of Assessment order dated 18.03.2016 passed u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that proper opportunity of cross examination and statements of third parties not provided by the ld. AO and secondly the statements recorded u/s.131 of the witnesses and buyers appearing in the sale deed for sale of agricultural land have not been considered by ld.CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, ld. DR submitted that the buyer in the statement has stated that the only Rs.3.00 lakh has been received and not Rs.31.00 lakh as claimed by the assessee to Appellant by : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Respondent by : Shri Ajitesh Meena Date of hearing : 13.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 27.10.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1380/PUN/2025 Bhasakar Kisanrav Giram 2 have been received from sale of agricultural and which is not falling in the category of capital asset. 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before me. I observe that the assessee is an individual and did not file the return of income for A.Y. 2012- 13. Based on the information about transaction of sale of immovable property not disclosed in the income-tax return and probable escapement of income, ld. Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.148 of the Act for carrying out the reassessment proceedings. During the course of reassessment proceedings, assessee furnished the written submission stating that the source of cash deposit of Rs.22.00 lakh on a single day on 19.11.2011 is arising from the sale consideration of Rs.31.00 lakh received from sale of agricultural land. Ld. AO observed that the sale considered mentioned in the sale deed is Rs.3.00 lakh and there is no evidence that the assessee has received Rs.31.00 lakh as sale consideration. Ld. AO observed that against the deposit of Rs.22.00 lakh assessee has already explained the source of Rs.3.00 lakh and thus made addition of difference amount of Rs.19.00 lakh. I further observe that in the appellate proceedings ld.CIT(A) has affirmed the action of the Assessing Officer inspite of the fact that assessee has referred to certain documents including the recording of statements (post assessment order) of the witnesses and the buyers who were part of the registered sale deed for sale of agricultural land by the assessee. However, ld.CIT(A) did not accept the contention stating that there are additional evidence not filed before the ld. Assessing Officer. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1380/PUN/2025 Bhasakar Kisanrav Giram 3 5. Before me, ld. Counsel for the assessee referred to paper book pages 68 to 75 and stated that the statement u/s.131 of the Act was recorded by the ld. AO on 15.10.2018 in which the witness have affirmed the statement of the assessee that consideration of Rs.31.00 lakh was received against sale of agricultural land, whereas the buyer has stated that only Rs.3.00 has been paid. I notice that the statement have been recorded after the conclusion of the reassessment proceedings but before the passing of the impugned order. It clearly indicates that ld. AO had carried out certain enquiries but ld.CIT(A) has not taken the cognizance of the same. 6. Under these given facts and circumstances where the witness have affirmed the contention of the assessee about the sale consideration of Rs.31.00 lakh received against sale of agricultural land allegedly claimed to be not falling in the category of capital asset, whereas the buyer has stated to have paid only Rs.3.00 lakh, I deem it proper that the matter needs to be restored to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for carrying out the denovo reassessment proceedings after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee and referring to the statements recorded u/s.131 of the Act, providing the opportunity of cross examination to the concerned parties including the buyer and then decide in accordance with law. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is hereby set aside and effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1380/PUN/2025 Bhasakar Kisanrav Giram 4 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 27th day of October, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 27th October, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "