JAYESH RAMESH CHAUDHARI,DHARANGAON V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(3), JALGAON, JALGAON

ITA 2615/PUN/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Jayesh Ramesh Chaudhari against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which confirmed an addition of Rs.19,00,000 to the assessee's income for unexplained cash deposits. The original assessment was made under sections 144 and 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, due to the assessee's failure to appear for hearings. The Tribunal dismissed the legal ground concerning the absence of a Document Identification Number (DIN) in the assessment order, noting that the DIN was indeed mentioned. However, the Tribunal found merit in providing another opportunity to the assessee regarding the unexplained cash deposit issue, thus remanding the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 652932 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DAYANAND JAWALIKAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2615/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Jayesh Ramesh Chaudhari, Jalgaon Road, Behind Vishwkarma Society, Matoshri Nagar, Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon – 425105 Maharashtra PAN : AHAPC8248F Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Jalgaon Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to the assessment year 2012-13 is directed against the order dated 28.08.2023 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) which inturn is arising out of the Assessment Order dated 09.12.2019 passed u/s.144 r..w.s.147 of the Act. 2. When the case was called for, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. With the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and on perusal of record, we proceed to adjudicate the grounds of appeal raised before us. Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Dayanand Jawalikar Date of hearing : 09.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 16.06.2025 ITA No.2615/PUN/2024 Jayesh Ramesh Chaudhari 2 3. In the instant appeal, following grounds of appeal have been raised by the assessee : “LEGAL GROUND': 1) In the facts, circumstances and position of law, assessment framed w/s.144 r.w.s. 147 of 1.T. Act, 1961 without generating and mentioning (15 digit alphanumeric code) i.e. Document Identification Number and without assigning any reasons for its non-generation in the assessment order is bad in law and void ab initio and hence may be annulled. MERITS : 2) In the facts, circumstances and position of law, Hon. CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi erred in dismissing the appeal filed against the assessment order and thereby confirming the addition of Rs.19,00,000/-. Ex-parte order : 3) The learned CIT (A), NFAC, Delhi, failed to appreciate that notices of hearing were not received by the appellant and that he ought to have verified whether proper notices have been served or not, before passing the ex-parte order. Therefore, the order passed by CIT (A), NFAC, may be set aside in view of Second Proviso to Rule 127(2) of 1.T. Rules. 1961.” 4. Through Legal Ground No.1, assessee has claimed that for non-mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN), the assessment order dated 09.12.2019 deserves to be quashed in view of CBDT Instruction No.19/2019 dated 14.08.2019. Before us, Ld. Departmental Representative submitted that DIN has been duly mentioned vide Intimation given with the communication for the assessment order u/s.144 r.w.s.147 of the Act. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We notice that the assessment order for A.Y. 2012-13 in the case of assessee who is an individual was framed on 09.12.2019 and tax computation part is in the computation sheet which is a part/annexure to the assessment order. At the time when the assessment is carried out as per the system of the department after framing of the assessment order and prior to ITA No.2615/PUN/2024 Jayesh Ramesh Chaudhari 3 calculating the tax, DIN is to be generated when the computation sheet is prepared. In this case, the assessment order is dated 09.12.2019 and in the computation sheet which is attached to the assessment order and forms part of the assessment order itself, Document Identification Number is mentioned as 20121096270. This assessment order has been communicated to the assessee through e-mail/ITBA portal on 09.12.2019 itself and the copy of the same is available on record as per which also the DIN is mentioned as 20121096270. It therefore clearly proves that DIN has been generated at the time of framing the assessment order and the same is also appearing on the body of assessment order as well as in the communication to the assessee for serving the assessment order. Thus, we fail to find any merit in the legal ground raised by the assessee and the same is hereby dismissed. 6. So far as Grounds of appeal No.2 and 3 are concerned, these are against the addition made by the AO at Rs.19.00 lakh for unexplained cash deposit in the savings bank account held by the assessee with Urban Cooperative Bank Limited, Dharangaon Branch, Dist. Jalgaon. We observe that the assessee failed to appear on any of the dates of hearing issued on 13.08.2019, 20.08.2019 and 10.10.2019. Ld. Assessing Officer had no option except to frame best judgment assessment u/s.144 of the Act wherein addition of Rs.19.00 lakh has been made. Though the assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but again assessee failed to appear on the given dates of hearing. One of the dates of hearing falls during covid-19 pandemic outbreak prevailed across the country. However, since the assessee failed to appear before ld.CIT(A) and provide any explanation/documents substantiating the source of cash deposit, ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue on merit and confirmed the addition. We however considering the ITA No.2615/PUN/2024 Jayesh Ramesh Chaudhari 4 facts of the case and in the larger interest of justice, deem it proper to afford one more opportunity to the assessee. We accordingly restore the issue raised on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication for which reasonable opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide latest email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Grounds of appeal No.2 and 3 raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 16th day of June, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 16th June, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune "