DINESH DAMODAR SHUKLA,NASHIK V. ITO WARD 2(1), NASHIK

ITA 891/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Dinesh Damodar Shukla, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A) which upheld certain additions made by the CPC, Bengaluru, to his income for the Assessment Year 2021-22. The additions included income that the appellant argued had already been taxed under different heads, leading to double taxation. The CIT(A) had dismissed the initial appeal due to the appellant's non-appearance, without addressing the merits of the case. The Tribunal noted the obligation of the CIT(A) to decide on the merits even in the absence of the appellant, referencing the Bombay High Court's decision in PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669467 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S. SADANANDA SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHORE PHADKE
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Capital Gains

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.891/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22 Dinesh Damodar Shukla Pacific Marketing, 8B, Vanvihar Colony, Parijat Nagar, Nashik-422007, Maharashtra PAN: ADBPS3189E Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Nashik Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2021-22 is directed against the order dated 28.01.2025 of Addl/JCIT(A)-10, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Intimation Order dated 08.07.2022 passed u/s.143(1) of the Act. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in sustaining the addition made by the learned CPC, Bengaluru of Rs.7,91,747/- and thereby assessing total income of appellant at Rs.28,44,540/-as against returned income of Rs.20,52,790/-. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and facts in upholding the addition made by the learned CPC, Bengaluru amounting to Rs. 6,55,168/-, without appreciating that, all the items for which addition has been made have already been offered for tax, either under the head \"Income from Capital Gains\" or under the head \"Income from Other Sources\"; as such the said addition is leading to double taxation. Assessee by : Shri Kishore Phadke Revenue by : Shri S.Sadananda Singh Date of hearing : 19.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 25.06.2025 ITA No.891/PUN/2025 Dinesh Damodar Shukla 2 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in sustaining addition of Rs.1,06,586/- being Interest on PPF investment and Rs.30,000/- being agricultural income, as these incomes are exempt in the hands of taxpayer. 4. Appellant contends that the learned CIT(A) ought to have granted appellant a better opportunity of being heard, as none of the notices of hearing issued by the learned CIT(A) had been received on the e-mail ID registered on the ITBA Portal. 5. Appellant craves leave to add/alter/delete/ modify, all/ any of the above grounds of appeal.” 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assesse failed to appear on the given date of hearing before ld.CIT(A) resulting into dismissal of the appeal. Ld. CIT(A) has also not dealt with merits of the case and merely confirmed the adjustments made in the Intimation order u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act. Therefore, a prayer is made to set aside the impugned order and restore the issues raised on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose this request. 4. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. Assessee is an individual and return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 filed on 27.01.2022 declaring income of Rs.20,52,790/- has been processed u/s.143(1)(a) of the Act making certain prima-facie adjustments, assessing the income at Rs.28,44,540/-. Assessee challenged the adjustments made by CPC by filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A) but failed to appear on the given dates of hearing. I also notice that ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-appearance and has not adjudicated the issues on merits as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held ITA No.891/PUN/2025 Dinesh Damodar Shukla 3 that ld.CIT(A)/NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits even in an exparte order. 5. Under the given facts and circumstances and considering the prayer of the ld. Counsel for the assessee, I deem it appropriate to give one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A) and adduce in support of its grounds of appeal. Needless to say that ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Order pronounced on this 25th day of June, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 25th June, 2025. Satish ITA No.891/PUN/2025 Dinesh Damodar Shukla 4 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 "