MR. SANJAY SHYAMRAO KADAM, AHMEDNAGAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, AHMEDNAGAR, AHEDNAGAR

ITA 702/PUN/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1648 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 12-06-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 04-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 139(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.702/PUN/2024 नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Sanjay Shyamrao Kadam, At Post Karjat, Mhasoba Gate, Karjat, Dist. Ahmednagar – 414 402 Maharashtra PAN : AYSPK8482G Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ahmednagar Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 23.02.2024 for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual, no regular return of income under the provisions of section 139(1) for the A.Y. 2017-18 was filed. The Assessing Officer (AO), based on the information that the appellant made cash deposit of Rs.10,19,500/- with Union Bank of India, Karjat Branch, Ahmednagar, issued notice u/s.142(1) on 09.03.2018 calling upon the appellant to file the return of Assessee by : Shri Prasad Bhandari Revenue by : Shri Abdesh Kumar Jha Date of hearing : 13.06.2024 Date of pronouncement : 13.06.2024 ITA No.702/PUN/2024 2 income for the A.Y. 2017-18 which was duly served upon him. The said notice remained uncomplied with. The assessee had also not complied with the hearing notices. In the circumstances, the AO made addition of cash deposit of Rs.10,19,500/- as unexplained money and assessed to tax u/s.115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. 5. The ld. AR submits that the appellant could not cause any appearance either before the AO/CIT(A) owing to the fact that hearing notices was sent on e-mail and through ITBA portal. Since the appellant is an illiterate, he could not check e-mail. In the circumstances, it is prayed that the matter be restored to the file of AO in the interest of justice. 6. On the other hand, the ld. Sr. DR has no serious objection for remand of the matter. 7. I heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant material on record. Admittedly, the assessment as well as appellate orders were passed ex parte. Considering the above fact and the submissions made on behalf of assessee explaining the reasons for non-compliance with ITA No.702/PUN/2024 3 hearing notices both before the AO and CIT(A), I deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of AO for denovo disposal of the appeal in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. I order accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 13 th day of June, 2024. Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 13 th June, 2024. Satish आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5 . गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.