Sambhaji Rambhau Bhalekar, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 10(3), Pune

ITA 13/PUN/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0121 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 02-01-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE SINGLE MEMBER CASE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 13/PUN/2022: Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sambhaji Rambhau Bhalekar Thergaon, Chinchwad, Pune-411 033 PAN: AAOPB 3196 Q :Appellant Vs. The I.T.O. Ward 10(3) Pune : Respondent Appellant by : Shri M.K. Kulkarni Respondent by : Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of Hearing : 29-07-2022 Date of Pronouncement : ____-08-2022 ORDER This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2011-12 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi’s order dated 21-12-2021 passed in case No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2021-22/1037976076(1) involving proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in short “the Act”. Heard both the parties. Case law perused. 2. The assessee’s sole substantive grievance raised in the instant appeal challenges correctness of both the learned lower authorities’ action treating cash deposits of Rs. 25lakhs on 25-6-2010 as unexplained in the course of assessment dated 21-03-2014 as upheld in lower appellate order passed; ex parte and without dealing with merits of foregoing issue. 3. Learned counsel invited my attention to the lower appellate discussion holding that the assessee had never been served notice under the faceless scheme. The fact however, remains that lower appellate order under challenge has afforded 16 hearings to this taxpayer. I therefore reject the assessee’s instant technical argument. 2 ITA 13/PUN/2022 Sambhaji R. Bhalekar A.Y. 2011-12 4. Coming to the merits of the issue of correctness of cash deposit amounting to Rs. 25 lakhs, it emerges that neither the learned lower authorities have considered this taxpayer’s regular source of income as well as cash in hand all along nor there is any satisfactory reply coming from the tax-payer’s side during the course of hearing. Faced with this situation, I conclude that that a lump sum addition of Rs. 20 lakhs only would meet the ends of justice with a rider the same shall not be treated as a precedent. The assessee gets a relief of Rs. 5.00 lakhs in other words. Necessary computation shall follow as per law 5. This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 17 th August 2022. Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune; Dated, this 17 th day of August 2022 Ankam Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT -1 Pune 4. The CIT(A) , NFAC 5. The SMC Bench, ITAT Pune. 6. Guard File BY ORDER, Sr. Private Secretary /// TRUE COPY /// ITAT, Pune. 3 ITA 13/PUN/2022 Sambhaji R. Bhalekar A.Y. 2011-12 Date 1 Draft dictated on 03-08-2022 Sr.PS 2 Draft placed before author 08-08-2022 Sr.PS 3 Draft proposed and placed before the second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by second Member AM/JM 5 Approved draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr.PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on 17-08-2022 Sr.PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of order 17-08-2022 Sr.PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk 17-08-2022 Sr.PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R 11 Date of dispatch of order