JAYESH NAGRAJ JAIN,SANGLI V. ITO WARD 2, SANGLI, SANGLI

ITA 480/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Jayesh Nagraj Jain, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, which sustained an addition of Rs.63,66,000 to his income for the assessment year 2019-20 under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer due to the assessee's failure to provide satisfactory explanations regarding the source of funds for property purchases. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-compliance as the assessee failed to respond to notices. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, decided to remand the matter back to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision after allowing the assessee another opportunity to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 787515 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 24-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N C SHILPA
• Assessee Lawyers: KISHOR B PHADKE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; TDS; Competent authority
• Section: 148; 142(1); 69

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.480/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2019-20 Jayesh Nagraj Jain Flat No.5, Aadinath Nagar Society, Ratanshi Nagar, Sangli – 416416 Vs. ITO, Ward-2, Sangli PAN: AARPJ5795J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Kishor B Phadke Department by : Smt N C Shilpa, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 17-11-2025 Date of pronouncement : 18-11-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 23.12.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2019-20. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissing the appeal for non-compliance and thereby sustaining the addition of Rs.63,66,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.480/PUN/2025 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has filed his return of income on 28.08.2018 declaring total income of Rs.4,28,590/- after claiming deduction of Rs.4,28,590/- under Chapter VI-A. It was observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee, during the financial year 2018-19 relevant to assessment year 2019-20, has undertaken the following transactions: S. No. Information Code Information Description Amount (Rs.) 1 TDS-192 TDS statement – Salary to employees (Sec.192) 12,00,000/- 2 SFT-012(B) Purchase by any person of immovable property 1,57,94,560/- Total 1,69,94,560/- 4. Accordingly a notice u/s 148A(b) of the Act was issued to the assessee with prior approval from the competent authority. The assessee was also asked to explain as to why the above receipts shall not be treated as income chargeable to tax which has escaped the assessment. Subsequently notice u/s 148 of the Act on 29.03.2023 was issued in response to which the assessee filed his return of income on 24.04.2023 declaring total income of Rs.7,89,180/-. The Assessing Officer thereafter issued statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act in response to which the assessee submitted that he had purchased a plot for Rs.57,00,000/- and a flat for Rs.35,16,000/- jointly with another person in which his share is 50%. The assessee also submitted the purchase deed of plot for Rs.57,00,000/- but did not submit the purchase deed of flat for Rs.25,16,000/-. It was submitted that he has taken several loans from various persons but he has not submitted any loan related Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.480/PUN/2025 documents to substantiate the same. The Assessing Officer, therefore, in absence of any satisfactory explanation from the side of the assessee, made addition of Rs.63,66,000/- being 50% share of the assessee by observing as under: 5. Since the assessee did not respond to any of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that out of 3 notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee has sought adjournment on one occasion and could not furnish the details on the remaining 2 occasions. Further, on the very last date the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC passed the order. He submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.480/PUN/2025 8. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 9. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case made addition of Rs.63,66,000/- in absence of any satisfactory explanation given by the assessee before the Assessing Officer regarding the source of purchase of property. We find despite 3 opportunities granted by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee did not respond to such notices for which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case and decide the issue as per fact and law and after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to make his submissions, if any, before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.480/PUN/2025 We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 18th November, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 18th November, 2025 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No.480/PUN/2025 S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 17.11.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 18.11.2025 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk 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 Printed from counselvise.com "