Anil Malleshappa Gore, Solapur V. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 1 (1), Solapur

ITA 268/PUN/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4154 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 23-02-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 143(3); 133(6)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” Ɋायपीठ पुणे मŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.268/PUN/2020 िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ /Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anil Malleshappa Gore, 39, hotgi Road, Vikas Nagar, Solapur – 413003. PAN: AFRPG 9615 H Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Solapur. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee by None. Revenue by Shri Arvind Desai – DR Date of hearing 16/06/2022 Date of pronouncement 23/06/2022 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR.DIPAK P.RIPOTE, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-7, Pune’s, order dated 29.11.2019for the Assessment Year 2014-15, involving proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. Addition of Rs.9,60,697 made u/s.41(1) by the Assessing Officer, and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 7 Pune, is unjust. 2. Addition of Rs.53,69,020 made on account of profit on sale of the property by the Assessing Officer, and confirmed by the ITA No.268/PUN/2020 for A.Y.2014-15 Anil Malleshappa Gore (A) 2 Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Pune is not justified.” 2. Case called twice. None appeared on-behalf of the appellant assessee. Hence, this appeal is decided Ex-Party. We have studied the orders of the lower authority, heard the Ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue. In this case, the Return of Income(RoI) was E-filed on 31/03/2015 declaring income of Rs.2,65,430/-. As per the assessment order the assessee is Builder and land developer. During the assessment proceedings the assessing officer issued letters under section 133(6) of the Act, to certain creditors appearing in the list of creditors submitted by the assessee. Those persons filed reply. It was observed by the Assessing Officer(AO) that there was difference in the amount appearing as outstanding in those persons books vis-à-vis amount shown by assessee in his books. The AO confronted these facts to the assessee. The AR of the assessee stated during the assessment proceedings that he has no objection if the difference in the amount which is Rs.9,60,697/- is added u/s.41(1) of the Act. Accordingly, the AO made addition of Rs.9,60,697/-. The AO also observed that there was transaction of Rs.92,00,000/- appearing in the AIR information received by the AO regarding assessee. The AO asked assessee to explain it. Assessee submitted that to avoid litigation he voluntarily offer long term capital gain. However, the AO observed that ITA No.268/PUN/2020 for A.Y.2014-15 Anil Malleshappa Gore (A) 3 assessee has shown the impugned asset in his balance sheet as current asset and not as investment. Hence, the AO added Rs.53,69,020/- (Sale consideration Rs.92,00,000/- less cost as per balance sheet Rs.38,30,980/-) as business income. 3. The assessee filed appeal before the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal). The ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as assessee failed to appear before the ld.CIT(A) and failed to file any submission. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before this Tribunal. Even no one appeared before us during the hearing. However, in the interest of substantial justice, we set aside the case to ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal). The ld.CIT(A) shall grant opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall file all the necessary documents/evidence before the ld.CIT(A). 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 23 rd June, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S.S.GODARA) (DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 23 rd June, 2022/ SGR* ITA No.268/PUN/2020 for A.Y.2014-15 Anil Malleshappa Gore (A) 4 आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “ए” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune.