LATE SATISHKUMAR BHAGATRAM CHADHA THROUGH L/H MAYUR SATISHKUMAR CHADHA,PUNE V. ITO, WARD 6(3), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 1327/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the legal heir of Late Satishkumar Bhagatram Chadha against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was filed following an ex-parte assessment order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, which made an addition of Rs. 16,13,000 under section 69A of the Act. The CIT(A)'s order was challenged on the grounds that the legal heirs were not properly represented and that they were not provided a copy of the Remand Report for rebuttal, violating the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 772825 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AJAY D. KULKARNI
• Assessee Lawyers: NILESH KHANDELWAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”SMC” \u0011ा यपीठ पुणे म\u0017। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. /ITA No.1327/PUN/2025 िनधा\u0005रण वष\u0005 / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Late Satishkumar Bhagatram Chadha through L/H Mayur Satishkumar Chadha 966, Laxmi Road, Raviwar Peth, Pune-411030, Maharashtra V s Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(3), Pune PAN: AEEPC1381G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee by Shri Nilesh Khandelwal - (AR) Revenue by Shri Ajay D. Kulkarni - (DR) Date of hearing 26/08/2025 Date of pronouncement 28/08/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Legal Heir of Late Satishkumar B Chadha against the Order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act passed by Commissioner Of Income Tax (appeal) (NFAC), herein referred as CIT(A), for AY 2017-18 on 14/03/2025, emanating from Assessment Order u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act dated 9/12/2019. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1327/PUN/2025 2 2. Submission of ld.AR : It has been submitted by Ld.Authorised Representative of the Assessee that Late Satishkumar B Chadha died in September 2021. Copy of the death certificate filed by Ld.AR. Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) had called for a report from the Assessing Officer but copy of the Remand Report has not been provided to the Assessee for rebuttal. He submitted that Assessee had filed Return of Income. Ld.AR submitted that Late Satishkumar was maintaining books of accounts hence addition made u/s 69A is bad in law. He filed a case law paper book. Ld.AR submitted that Late Satishkumar was in the habit of withdrawing money from bank and re-depositing it in bank. The Cash withdrawals explains the deposits. Hence no addition can be made. 3. Submission of Ld.DR : Ld. Departmental Representative Relied on the Assessment Order and Order of the CIT(A). 4. Findings and Analysis : We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case late Satishkumar B.Chadha (assessee) had filed Return of Income on 09/03/2018. The Return of Income was selected for Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1327/PUN/2025 3 scrutiny accordingly the Assessing Officer issued various notices. The Assessee failed to file reply during assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte Assessment order u/s 144 of the income Tax Act making an addition of Rs.16,13,000/- u/s. 69A of the Act. Aggrieved by the Assessment Order the Assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal) on 07/01/2020. 4.1 In this case, it is an admitted fact that Late Satishkumar died in September 2021 when the Appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) was pending against the Assessment Order. However, it is observed that the CIT(A) has passed Appeal Order u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act in the name of Satishkumar Bhagatram Chadha on 14/03/2025, whereas Late Satish Kumar had died in 2021. Therefore, it was the duty of the CIT(A) to bring Legal Heirs of the deceased assessee on record and pass the Order accordingly. 4.2 It is also noted that the Ld.CIT(A) has not provided copy of the Remand Report filed by the Assessing Officer under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules to the Legal Heirs of the deceased assessee Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1327/PUN/2025 4 to rebut the findings of the AO. It is violation of Principle of natural justice. 4.3 In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set aside the Order of the CIT(A) to CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. The CIT(A) shall bring on record the Legal heirs of the deceased assessee. Also, CIT(A) shall provide copy of the Remand Report to the legal heirs and provide them opportunity of hearing. 5. In the result, Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 28th August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (DIPAK P.RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 28th August, 2025 Satish आदेशक\u0006\u0007ितिलिपअ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant. 2. \b यथ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीय\bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब\u0013च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गाड\u0016फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "