॥ आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण, पुणे “बी” न्यायपीठ, पुणे में ॥ ITAT-Pune Page 1 of 4 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपऩलसं. / ITA No.159/PUN/2023 निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-2010 Sujeet Manikrao Jagdhane 19, Ganesh Colony, Satara – 415001 PAN: ABGPJ9649D . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle Satara. . . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा/ Appearances Assessee by : Shri S. N. Puranik Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधईकीतधरऩख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 03/04/2023 घोर्णधकीतधरऩख / Date of Pronouncement : 03/04/2023 आदेश/ ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI, AM; Present appeal is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) [for short “CIT(A)”] dt. 26/12/2022 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short “the Act”] in turn originated out of assessment order dt. 20/12/2011 passed u/s 143(3) by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Satara Circle, Satara [for short “AO”] for assessment year [for short “AY”] 2009-10. Sujeet Manikrao Jagdhane ITA No.159/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2009-10 ITAT-Pune Page 2 of 4 2. The brief facts of the case under appeal are; 2.1 The assessee is a wholesale distributor of liquor whose case was selected for scrutiny, wherein the Ld. AO rejecting the explanation of assessee that various amounts appearing in the Capital Account are relating to transaction of transfers from one proprietary concern to other concern, has brought to tax the net effect of such transactions of ₹4,44,329/- as unexplained credit in the hands of the appellant. 2.2 In an appeal the Ld. CIT(A) dilating the findings of his lower tax authority upheld the addition in the absence of evidential documents and explanation. Aggrieved thereby the assessee by the present appeal challenged the action of both the lower tax authority on the grounds of appeal raised in Form No. 36. 3. Heard both the sides and perused material available on record. We find that, Ld. CIT(A) while confirming the aforestated addition as unexplained credit has spelt out the reasons thereof which ispo-fact sufficient to trigger re- verification of the facts in the light of evidential document Sujeet Manikrao Jagdhane ITA No.159/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2009-10 ITAT-Pune Page 3 of 4 and necessary explanation to the satisfaction of Ld. AO, and the same can be witnessed from para 8.2 at page 10 of the first appellate order which is reproduced herein; 8.2 The additional ground No. 1 of the appeal relates to addition of Rs.4,44,329/- as unexplained credit. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the capital account of the assessee in M/s Sadguru Sales Corporation, there are entries with the narration “Differ”. In Op. Balance adjusted of Op. Balance differ adjusted amount Rs.4,44,329/-. The appellant could not explain the difference or reconcile the entries. Therefore, the AO made addition of Rs.4,44,329/-. I find that the additional ground involves a finding fact in which evidence is not on record and the appellant has not given satisfactory explanation or reconciliation of the entries. Therefore, the additional ground of appeal does not qualify for admission. The same is accordingly not entertained. 4. In the light of above, we are of the considered view that, the rejection of additional ground by the Ld. CIT(A) without calling for remand report or admitting the additional evidence in adjudicating the claim of the appellant is unjustified. The matter shall seize in the interest of both the parties if the same is reconsidered in Sujeet Manikrao Jagdhane ITA No.159/PUN/2023 A.Y. 2009-10 ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 4 the evince of reconciliation statement and supportive explanation (if any) of the appellant. For this limited purpose we deem it fit to remit the matter back to the file of Ld. AO to deal with the issue in three effective hearings following the principle of natural justice. Needless to state that, the appellant shall co-operate and shall not seek any unreasoned adjournment. We order accordingly. 5. In result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, the order pronounced in the open court on this Monday 3 rd day of April, 2023. -S/d- -S/d- S.S. GODARA G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ PUNE ; दिन ांक / Dated : 10 th day of April, 2023. GCVSR आदेशकीप्रधिधलधपअग्रेधिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1.अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The concerned Pr. CIT (M.H.-India) 4. DR, ITAT, Pune Bench ‘B’, Pune 5. ग र्डफ़ इल / Guard File. आिेश नुस र / By Order, वररष्ठ दनजी सदिव / Sr. Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय न्य य दिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.