LAXMAN BHAU PAWALE,AT POST PIRANGUT MUKAIWADI PUNE V. ITO WARD 2.4 RANGE CODE 53, PUNE SWARGET

ITA 1541/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Laxman Bhau Pawale, an individual farmer, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi, which sustained an addition of Rs.3,74,17,200 as undisclosed capital gain for the assessment year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer had initially reopened the assessment based on information that the assessee sold immovable property for Rs.3,23,80,000 and made additions under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) rejected additional evidence provided by the assessee on technical grounds due to non-filing of an application under Rule 46A of the IT Rules. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments, noting that similar treatment was given to the assessee's brother's case, where the land was accepted as agricultural and not a capital asset.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 791254 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 20-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH GAWALI
• Assessee Lawyers: DINESH SUDAM KUDALE
• Keywords: Capital asset; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Reasonable cause; Capital Gains
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1); 2(14)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1541/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2015-16 Laxman Bhau Pawale At Post Mukaiwadi Pirangut Taluka Mulshi, Pune – 412115 Vs. ITO, Ward 2.4, Range Code 53, Pune PAN: BZLPP3421M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Dinesh Sudam Kudale Department by : Shri Rajesh Gawali, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 10-12-2025 Date of pronouncement : 12-12-2025 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, VP: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.04.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2015-16. 2. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissing the appeal by not condoning the delay and thereby sustaining the addition of Rs.3,74,17,200/- made by the Assessing Officer as undisclosed capital gain. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year. On the basis of information available with the department that the assessee has sold immovable Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.1541/PUN/2025 property at Rs.3,23,80,000/-, the Assessing Officer, after recording reasons reopened the assessment and accordingly notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) was issued on 30.03.2022. However, the assessee did not file any return in response to the said notice. Subsequently the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 142(1) of the Act which remained un-complied with. A show cause notice issued u/s 144 of the Act also remained un-complied with. The Assessing Officer thereafter completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act and made addition of Rs.3,74,17,200/- as undisclosed capital gain. 4. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee filed various details which are in the shape of additional evidence. However, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC rejected the additional evidence on the ground that the assessee has not filed the same before the Assessing Officer without any reasonable cause and therefore, he rejected the same and dismissed the appeal by observing as under: “In the light of above discussed facts at point no.-(i) to (xiv), grossly negligent behaviour of the appellant assessee during assessment proceedings before the AO, non-filing of application under Rule 46A of IT Rules before seeking to introduce such additional evidences and reliance placed on the Judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court, this Appellate authority is in the view that, the addition made by the Assessing officer for such capital gains earned by the appellant for this AY which were unreported / un-taxed (a) Rs.3,23,80,000/- against sale of an immovable property and (b) Rs.50,37,200/- against sale consideration received for such immovable property, are found to be correct and thus UPHELD. The grounds of appeal no.-1 to 3 are not accepted and this appeal is thus not allowed.” 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.1541/PUN/2025 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset referring to the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, NFAC in the case of brother of the assessee submitted that he has accepted the sale of land as agricultural land and no addition on account of capital gain has been made in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Since the assessee in the instant case is a farmer and an illiterate person, therefore, in the interest of justice, the various evidences filed before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC should have been accepted by him instead of rejecting the same on technical grounds for non-filing of an application under Rule 46A. He submitted that in the interest of justice, the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the Assessing Officer with a direction to re-adjudicate the issue. 7. The Ld. DR on the other hand heavily relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. 8. 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. It is an admitted fact that due to non-response to the various statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer, he completed the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 14.03.2024 and brought to tax an amount of Rs.3,74,17,200/- as undisclosed capital gain. Since the assessee has not complied to the various statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC rejected the various evidences filed before him in shape of Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.1541/PUN/2025 additional evidence in absence of any application made under Rule 46A and thereby sustained the addition made by the Assessing Officer. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that the assessee is a farmer and an illiterate person for which he could not participate in the assessment proceedings. Further, in the case of the brother of the assessee, the Assessing Officer in the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act has not made any addition and treated the land sold as agricultural land and not as capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) of the Act. It is his submission that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details before the Assessing Officer. 9. We find some force in the above arguments of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. We find from the order passed by the Assessing Officer in the case of the brother of the assessee that he has accepted the sale of land as agricultural land and not a capital asset as per provisions of section 2(14) of the Act. Although the assessee has not participated in the assessment proceedings, however, we find the assessee filed various details before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC justifying his claim that the land in question is not a capital asset being an agricultural land. However, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC did not admit the additional evidences filed before him in absence of proper application under Rule 46A. Therefore, 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 the Assessing Officer with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate his case by filing the requisite details Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.1541/PUN/2025 and decide the issue as per fact and law after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the requisite details before the Assessing Officer on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Assessing Officer is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. 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 12th December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 12th December, 2025 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘A’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No.1541/PUN/2025 S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 10.12.2025 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 11.12.2025 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 Office Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "