SANGEETA ARUN DESHMUKH, SATARA V. ITO, WARD-5, SATARA

MA 19/PUN/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Smt. Sangeeta Arun Deshmukh, who filed a miscellaneous application seeking rectification of an earlier Tribunal order that upheld significant additions to her income under sections 69 and 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2014-2015. The Tribunal's earlier decision was based on the inability of the assessee to explain the sources of certain investments and cash credits. During the hearing of the miscellaneous application, it was argued that all relevant details had been provided but not verified. The Tribunal, referencing precedents from the Supreme Court, concluded that there was no mistake in the original order that could be rectified under the specified section of the Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 137904 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: DismissedDismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2023
• Other Referred Cases: ACIT vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., [2008] 305 ITR 227 (SC), CIT vs. Reliance Telecom Ltd., [2021] 133 taxmann.com 41 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained investment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMASHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.No.19/PUN/2023 Arising out of ITA.No.172/PUN./2020 - Assessment Year – 2014-2015 Smt. Sangeeta Arun Deshmukh, 343/312, Indrapastha, Gadkar Ali, Satara – 415 001. Maharashtra. PAN AKHPD2857M vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 5, Satara. (Applicant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri M.K. Kulkarni For Revenue : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of Hearing : 19.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 25.05.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. This assessee’s miscellaneous application M.A.No.19/PUN./2023 in her corresponding main appeal ITA.No.172/PUN./2020 assessment year 2014-2015, filed u/s.254(2) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), seeks to recall/rectify our order dated 04.10.2022. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges during the course of hearing that our order in issue dated 04.10.2022 had upheld the learned lower authorities action making sec.69 unexplained investment and sec.68 unexplained cash credit additions of Rs.55,46,254/- 2 MA.No.19/PUN./2023 and Rs.84.74 lakhs, respectively. Learned counsel submits during the course of hearing that the assessee had duly filed all the relevant details which have nowhere been verified till date. He fails to dispute that the CIT(A) had also sought a remand report wherein the assessee could not explain source of the above twin heads before the Assessing Officer. Faced with the situation, we conclude in light of hon’ble apex court in the case of ACIT vs. Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Ltd., [2008] 305 ITR 227 (SC); CIT vs. Reliance Telecom Ltd., [2021] 133 taxmann.com 41 (SC); that our impugned order does not suffer from any mistake even much less an apparent one so as to invoke sec.254(2) rectification jurisdiction. Rejected accordingly. 3. This assessee’s miscellaneous application is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 25 th May, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMASHALI) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 25 th May, 2023 VBP/- 3 MA.No.19/PUN./2023 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. Ld. CIT(A)-10, Pune 4. Ld. Pr. CIT-3, Pune 5. DR ITAT Pune-B Bench, Pune 6. Guard File. //BY Order// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.