GIRIDHAR GOPAL THAKUR (THROUGH L/H SHRIDHAR GIRDHAR THAKUR),PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, PANVEL

ITA 2370/PUN/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the legal heir of Giridhar Gopal Thakur against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2013-14. The appeal was filed due to various grievances regarding the reassessment proceedings and the subsequent assessment of income, including the treatment of interest as income and the non-acceptance of cited judgments. The Tribunal noted procedural errors in the handling of the legal heir's representation and directed a re-examination of the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787891 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 13-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: CIT Vs Govindbhai Mamaiya-(2014) 367 ITR 0498 (SC), CIT Vs Ghanshyam HUF-(2009) 315 ITR 1, Manjeet Singh HUF-(2016) 65 Taxmann.com 160
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMBARNATH KHULE THROUGH VIRTUAL
• Assessee Lawyers: AJINKYA VAISHAMPAYAN
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; Capital receipt
• Section: 143(3); 28; 2

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE MS.ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.2370/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Giridhar Gopal Thakur (Through Legal Heir Shridhar Giridhar Thakur), At Dhutum, Post Jasai, Uran, Dist.Raigad – 410206. Maharashtra. V s The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Panvel. PAN: AKCPT4076F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Ajinkya Vaishampayan Revenue by Shri Ambarnath Khule (through virtual hearing) – JCIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/11/2025 Date of pronouncement 24/11/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2013-14 dated 29.08.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1962/PUN/2025 [A] 2 section 143(3) r.w.ss 147 of the Act, dated 23.11.2017. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. The learned AO erred in rejecting the objection of the assessee to the reassessment proceedings initiated as there was no failure to disclose material fact on the part of the assessee therefore the assessment passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 is bad in law. 2. The learned AO has erred in assessing the income at Rs. 25,75,227/- as against income return at Rs. 1,21,808/-. 3. The learned AO erred in treating the interest ordered by the court u/s 28 of LAA 1894 as an income and working out the same to the tune of Rs. 49,08,454/ to be not a Capital Receipt and taxing 50% of the said interest i.e. Rs. 24,54,270/- u/s 56 r.w.s. 145A and 57(iv). 4. The learned AO erred in not following the judgments delivered by the apex court in the case of CIT Vs Govindbhai Mamaiya'-(2014) 367 ITR 0498 (SC), wherein, the observations of the Apex Court in the case of 'CIT Vs Ghanshyam HUF-(2009) 315 ITR 1' has been upheld and support has been derived there from. 5. The learned AO failed to note that judgment of Hon'ble Panjab Haryana High Court in case of 'Manjeet Singh HUF-(2016) 65 Taxmann.com 160 has been overruled by the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs Govindbhai Mamaiya. 6. The learned AO erred in not following the judgments cited by the appellant on a ground that in those cited decisions no reference or discussion or distinguishment has been made of decision of Hon'ble Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1962/PUN/2025 [A] 3 P&H High Court in the case of Manjeet Singh HUF (2016) 65 Taxmann.com 160. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal.” Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is observed that ld.CIT(A) has passed the order u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2013-14 on 29.08.2025 in the name of Girdhar Gopal Thakur. However, ld.AR brought to our notice that Assessee Mr.Girdhar Gopal Thakur has died on 25.02.2022. Ld.AR filed a paper book which also contains copy of the Death Certificate. In the Form No.36, the Legal Heir has been brought on record. Ld.AR also filed copy of order of Hon’ble Joint Civil Judge, Panvel dated 22.08.2025 in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.1648/2024 brining on record the Legal Heirs. 3. However, ld.CIT(A) has erroneously passed an order without bringing on record the Legal Heir. In these facts and circumstances of the case, the order of ld.CIT(A) is set-aside to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Ld.AR has filed a paper book containing 101 pages. Ld.CIT(A) shall provide opportunity to the Legal Heir of the Assessee to file all the necessary documents. The Legal Heir of the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1962/PUN/2025 [A] 4 assessee shall file the necessary documents before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 4. In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24 November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- MS.ASTHA CHANDRA Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पपणे / Pune; ददिधंक / Dated : 24 Nov, 2025/ SGR आदेशकीप्रनिनलनपअग्रेनषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपऩलधर्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. नवभधगऩयप्रनिनिनर्, आयकर अपऩलऩय अनर्करण, “एस एम सऩ” बेंच, पपणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गधर्ाफ़धइल / Guard File. आदेशधिपसधर / BY ORDER, / / TRUE COPY / / Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपऩलऩय अनर्करण, पपणे/ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "