DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-8, PUNE, PUNE V. SHRI ASLAM BADSHAH SHAIKH , PUNE

ITA 2355/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune against Aslam Badshah Shaikh concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which arose from an earlier assessment order. The primary issue in the appeal was the addition of a substantial amount of cash deposits made during the demonetization period, which were deemed unexplained by the assessing officer. The Tribunal noted the absence of the respondent-assessee in multiple hearings and decided to proceed ex parte. The Tribunal found that the lower authorities had not adequately addressed the nature of the business conducted by the assessee and the source of the cash deposits, leading to the decision to remit the case back for a thorough re-assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775874 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P MURKUNDE
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause
• Section: 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.2355/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-8, Pune Vs. Aslam Badshah Shaikh, Survey No 22/3/4/5-2, MIDC Road, Hinjawadi, Pune 411057, Maharashtra PAN: BRWPS4401H Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of Revenue pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 17.09.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 18.12.2019 passed u/s.144 of the Act. 2. When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf the respondent-assessee. In the past when the appeal was fixed for hearing on 17.02.2025, 15.04.2025, 19.06.2025 and 04.08.2025 there was no representation on behalf of the respondent-assessee. Respondent-assessee was served with the notice of hearing fixing the case on 19.08.2025 but there is no representation. Therefore, it seems that the respondent- Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 19.08.2025 Date of pronouncement : 12.09.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2355/PUN/2024 Aslam Badshah Shaikh 2 assessee is not interested in appearing before this Tribunal. We therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the Revenue exparte qua respondent with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and the available records. 3. Ld. DR at the outset submitted that respondent-assessee failed to appear before both the lower authorities. Therefore, the matter deserves to be restored to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing officer for necessary adjudication. 4. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. We notice that the assessee is an individual and return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 e filed on 12.09.2018 declaring income of Rs.18,96,980/-. Case selected for scrutiny through CASS for the reasons large value cash deposit during demonetization period and abnormal increase in cash deposit during demonetization period as compared to pre- demonetization period. Valid notices u/s.143(2) and 142(1) of the Act served upon the assessee. However, on the subsequent dates of hearing, assessee failed to respond. Ld. Assessing Office made addition of the total cash deposit of Rs.4,17,18,810/-. u/s.69A r.w.s.115BBE of the Act assessing the income at Rs.4,46,15,790/-. Thereafter, assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but after filing the appeal and furnishing the statement of acts along with appeal there was no further compliance. Ld.CIT(A) based on the statement of facts accepted that the assessee is carrying on the business of sale of Petroleum products and accordingly estimated the profits @12% of the alleged cash deposit and sustained the addition of Rs.56,56,260/-. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2355/PUN/2024 Aslam Badshah Shaikh 3 5. We however notice that there is no evidence placed on record about the assessee running petrol pump nor any information about the books of account and the details of cash deposits have been filed. Also the Tax Audit Report furnished on line is not placed before us. Ld. CIT(A) has only estimated the profit @12% inspite of the fact that such huge net profit rate is not possible in the business of running a petrol pump. Considering all these aspects and also in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to remit back the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for denovo assessment which has to be carried out after providing reasonable opportunity to the respondent-assessee. Respondent-assessee is directed to furnish the requisite details to explain the source of alleged cash deposit during the denovo assessment proceedings. Respondent-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 Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 12th day of September, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 12th September, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2355/PUN/2024 Aslam Badshah Shaikh 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, “A” ब\u0011च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” 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 "