BALAJI MADHAVRAO MALWADE, Panvel V. Income Tax Officer, Maharashtra

ITA 1249/PUN/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8117 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 24-11-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment; Search and seizure
• Section: 153A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE [VIRTUAL HEARING] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. /ITA No.1249/PUN/2023 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Balaji Madhavrao Malwade, Tarang, 2 nd Floor, Plot No.33, Sector 10, Khanda Colony, New Panvel (West) – 410206 Maharashtra PAN : ACUPM4749A vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panvel (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Smt. Neha Deshpande Date of Hearing : 13.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.03.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2014-15, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055372984(1), dated 24.08.2023, involving proceedings u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex parte. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that the first and foremost substantial issue which arises from the rival pleadings is that of the correctness of the impugned section 148/147 proceedings itself once it has 2 ITA.No.1249/PUN/2023 Balaji Madhavrao Malwade come on record that the same had been initiated against the assessee based on the specific incriminating material found/seized during the course of search on 13.07.2016 conducted in case of M/s. India Bulls Housing Finance Limited. It is noticed in this factual backdrop that even the learned NFAC detailed discussion in para 6.1 onwards is fair enough in concluding that “specific evidences has been found in the Search and Seizure operations in the case of the company from which the assesee has bought the flat”. 3. This being the clinching factual position that the impugned addition of unexplained investment is based on the specific seized material, it is hereby concluded that the learned lower authorities could not have initiated section 148/147 proceedings as there is already a comprehensive provision for assessment of such third parties u/s.153C of the Act. Faced with this situation, I see no reason to sustain the impugned reopening in light of ITA No.49/Jab/2018’s “Third Member” decision in Kalyanika Infra Mega Ventures Private Ltd. Vs. DCIT dt. 09.10.2023. Learned Third Member has held section 153A to 153D applicable w.e.f. 01.06.2023 is a search initiated on or before 01.04.2021, form a complete code in itself. Faced with this situation, I quash the impugned reopening in very terms. The assessee succeeds in his first and foremost legal ground. 4. All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic. 3 ITA.No.1249/PUN/2023 Balaji Madhavrao Malwade 5. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26 th March, 2024. Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated : 26 th March, 2024 Satish Copy to : 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. / /By Order // //True Copy // Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.