BILAL KASAM MEMON,PUNE V. ITO, WARD 6(3), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1281/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Bilal Kasam Memon, an individual engaged in the business of scrap, who did not initially file a return of income for the assessment year 2017-18. The Income Tax Department reopened his case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, following information that he had sold and purchased immovable properties without declaring the income. The Assessing Officer (AO) assessed his income significantly higher than what he declared, leading to additions on account of short-term capital gains and unexplained investments in property. The assessee's appeal to the CIT was dismissed for want of prosecution, prompting the appeal to the Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 822654 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 19-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UODOL RAJ SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SACHIN KUMAR VIRTUALLY
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained investment; Principle of natural justice; Audi alteram partem
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 139

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"ए \"न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"A\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1281/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2017-18 Bilal Kasam Memon, Memon Manzil 451/3, Salisbury Park, Gultekdi, Pune-411037 Maharashtra PAN-ADHPM5491R Vs. ITO, Ward-6(3), Pune अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by: Shri Sachin Kumar (virtually) Department by: Shri Uodol Raj Singh, DR Date of hearing: 11-11-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 23-12-2025 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, J.M.:- This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 21.03.2025 which is arising out of assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 dated 31.03.2022 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the order of the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC In dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant is arbitrary, erroneous, contrary to law and is opposed to the principles of natural justice, equity and fair play. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.1281/PUN/2025 2. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A). NFAC has passed the order u/s 250 without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard and thus violating the principle of \"audi alteram partem.\" 3. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC has erred in confirming the income assessed by the Ld. AO to the tune of Rs. 1,30,13,320/- as against the returned income of Rs. 2,90,120/- without appreciating the correct facts of the case. 4. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A). NFAC has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 7,23,200/- by calculating 20% of the total value of the immovable property of Rs. 2,76,16,000/- on account of short term capital gain without perusing the submissions made during assessment proceedings. 5. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,20,00,000/- on account of unexplained source of income for purchase of immovable property u/s 69B without appreciating the submissions made and the döcümentary evidences provided by the appellant during the course of the impugned assessment proceedings. 6. That, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC has misdirected himself in dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant by simply concluding that the appellant was not able to substantiate the source of the unexplained income and no documentary evidences against the additions made by the Ld. AO have been provided by the appellant. 7. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A), NFAC has passed the appellate order in a mechanical way, without application of mind and without considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case. 8. That, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has passed the ex parte appellate order without giving sufficient opportunity of being heard. 9.That, the appellant may kindly be allowed to add, alter or modify any other points to the grounds of appeal at any time before or at the time of hearing. 10. That, the aforesaid grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other. 11.Any other order in the interest of justice may kindly be passed. 3. Facts of the case in brief, are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of scrap and has not furnished return of income under section 139 of the IT act. On the basis of information available on record that the assessee has sold immovable property for ₹ 36,16,000 and purchased immovable property for rupees 2,40,00,000/-and has not furnished his return of income, so has not offered any income for taxation with regard to above transactions during the period under consideration . Therefore the case of the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.1281/PUN/2025 assessee was reopened under section 147 of the IT act and notice under section 148 and 142 (1) of the IT act respectively were issued to the assessee . In response to notice under section 148 of the IT act the assessee furnished return of income declaring income of ₹ 2,90,120/- & also furnished some information. Not being satisfied with the reply of the assessee the assessing officer completed the assessment proceedings under section 147 rws 144 rws 144 B of the IT act and vide assessment order dated 31-03- 2022 determined income at ₹ 1,30,13,320/- as against the income returned by the assessee at ₹ 2,90,120/-. The above assessed income includes additions on account of, estimated short term capital gain of ₹ 7,23,200 on sale of immovable property of ₹ 36,16,000/- and addition of ₹ 1,20,00,000/- under section 69B of the IT act as unexplained investment towards purchase of immovable property. 4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT appeal. Since the assessee remained absent learned CIT appeal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before the tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.1281/PUN/2025 6. We have heard learned counsel from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard we find that learned CIT appeal dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. In this regard it was the sole prayer of the assessee that one final opportunity may kindly be provided to him to appear before the learned CIT appeal so that he can substantiate the grounds of appeal. In this regard We find that learned CIT appeal has issued last two notices of hearing to the assesse ie on 03-03-2025 & on 11-03-2025 in a time period of 07 days, which cannot be said to be reasonable opportunity of hearing. We also find that the assessee sought adjournment on earlier 2 occasions which proves that the assessee was responding to the notices issued by learned CIT appeal however due to issue of back-to-back 2 notices of hearing in a short span of 07 days the assessee could not furnish any reply. 7. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice we deem it fit to set aside the ex-parte order passed by learned CIT appeal and remand the matter back to the file of learned CIT appeal with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law on all the grounds raised before him after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.1281/PUN/2025 learned CIT appeal in this regard and to produce relevant submissions documents and evidences in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext otherwise learned CIT appeal shall be at liberty to pass appropriate orders as per law. The effective ground no 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Since the matter has been remanded back to the file of learned CIT appeal for deciding the appeal afresh as per fact and law the other grounds becomes infructuous hence not adjudicated. The appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes 8. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 23rd day of December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; ददिांक /Dated: 23rd December, 2025. Neeta Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No.1281/PUN/2025 आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि /Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"A\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"A\" Bench, Pune 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER, Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे /ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "