Surekha Tukaram Dudhe, Panvel V. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4, Panvel, Navi Mumbai

ITA 589/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Surekha Tukaram Dudhe, an individual engaged in the business of building, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune. The appeal was directed against the assessment order for the year 2015-16, which included various additions and disallowances to the declared income. The primary contention was the additions made under sections 43CA and 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the disallowance of agricultural income, which the Assessing Officer based on a revised income statement and lack of proof, respectively. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, citing the appellant's consent to the additions. However, the Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not address the appellant's claim of coercion during the confession, leading to the remand of the case for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 137518 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-12-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 26-12-2022
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 24-07-2022
• Other Referred Cases: Rameshchandra & Co. vs. CIT, 168 ITR 375 (Bombay), Deep Kukreti vs. CIT, 53 taxmann.com 161 (Uttarakhand)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 68; 43CA; 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.589/PUN/2022 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Surekha Tukaram Dudhe, Shop No.13, Dudhe Vitevari, Plot No.1, Sector- 3A, Karanjade, New Panvel Navi Mumbai- 410206. PAN : AIQPD9270M Vs. ITO, Ward-4, Panvel. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune [‘the CIT(A)’] dated 20.05.2022 for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engaged in the business of builder. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2015-16 was filed on 29.10.2015 Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue by : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date of hearing : 27.12.2022 Date of pronouncement : 28.12.2022 ITA No.589/PUN/2022 2 declaring total income of Rs.23,02,936/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Panvel (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 18.12.2017 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at total income of Rs.52,46,960/- after making disallowance of Rs.10,69,500/- u/s 43CA, addition of Rs.15,00,000/- u/s 68 and disallowance of agricultural income of Rs.2,56,705/-. The addition u/s 43CA and u/s 68 was made by the Assessing Officer based on the revised statement of income filed during the course of assessment proceedings and the addition of agricultural income was made by the Assessing Officer for want of proof of agricultural income. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of assessment, an appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal by holding that when the additions were made based on the consent of the appellant, no appeal lies placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Rameshchandra & Co. vs. CIT, 168 ITR 375 (Bombay) and the decision of the Hon’ble Uttarakhand High Court in the case of Deep ITA No.589/PUN/2022 3 Kukreti vs. CIT, 53 taxmann.com 161 (Uttarakhand) without delving into the merits of the additions. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. On perusal of the assessment order, it would be clear that the additions were made based on the revised statement furnished by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. However, before the ld. CIT(A), the appellant took a plea that the confession was made before the Assessing Officer on account of coercion exercised by the Assessing Officer, this assertion made by the appellant before the Assessing Officer was not delved upon by the ld. CIT(A) in his order. It is a settled position of law that no addition can be made by the Assessing Officer without bringing any corroborative evidence on record, merely based on the confession made by the assessee. In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the interests of justice would be met, if the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. ITA No.589/PUN/2022 4 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 28 th day of December, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. GODARA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 28 th December, 2022. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-11, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT (Central), Pune. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.