MADAN NAMDEV KAMTHE,PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2), PUNE

ITA 2410/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Madan Namdev Kamthe, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals (CIT(A)), which confirmed an addition of Rs.32,73,500 to the assessee's income for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The assessee argued that no such addition was made by the Assessing Officer in the original assessment order, and that the CIT(A) had confirmed this addition without issuing a notice of enhancement. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s confirmation of the addition was erroneous as it was not supported by the assessment order, which had accepted the returned income without any additions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 822812 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 17-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARSHIT BARI VIRTUAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SARVESH KHANDELWAL
• Keywords: Capital asset
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपऩल सं. / ITA No.2410/PUN/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Madan Namdev Kamthe, Plot NO.43, S.No.22, Kojagiri Sahakari Gruhrachana Society, Balajinagar, Dhankawadi, Pune – 411043. V s The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2), Pune. PAN: ASVPK9249G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Sarvesh Khandelwal Revenue by Shri Harshit Bari – Addl.CIT(Virtual) Date of hearing 18/12/2025 Date of pronouncement 22/12/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2019-20 dated 21.08.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 04.03.2024. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2410/PUN/2025 [A] 2 “1. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions of the act it be held, that the order passed by the CIT Appeals, NFAC is not tenable in law in as much as the CIT Appeals confirmed the addition which was never made by the Assessing Officer, that too without serving any notice of enhancement. The order passed by the CIT Appeals be cancelled. 2. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions of the act it be held, that CIT Appeals has failed to take into consideration the provisions of section 149 of the Income Tax Act in as much as the additions confirmed are less than Rs. 50,00,000/-. The additions so confirmed be deleted. a. The appellant prays to be allowed to raise, modify, rectify, and withdraw any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” Submission of ld.AR : 2. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) for the Assessee submitted that in the assessment order, there is no addition. Assessing Officer has accepted returned income. Ld.AR further submitted that the assessee does not understand Income Tax and his Tax Consultant erroneously filed appeal before ld.CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) has mentioned in the order that addition of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2410/PUN/2025 [A] 3 Rs.32,73,500/- is confirmed. However, in the assessment order, there is no such addition. Therefore, the order of ld.CIT(A) is bad in law. Ld.CIT(A) had not given any notice for enhancement. Submission of ld.DR : 3. Ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for the Revenue accepted that Assessing Officer had accepted returned income, hence, there was no need to file appeal before ld.CIT(A). Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, Assessee had filed return of income for A.Y.2019-20 declaring total income at Rs.5,75,540/-. Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 dated 24.03.2023, then, Assessing Officer issued various notices. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order accepted that the immovable property sold is rural agricultural land and hence, not a capital asset under Income Tax Act, hence, sale proceeds from sale of the immovable property are exempt. The last paragraph no.4 of the assessment order is reproduced here as under : Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2410/PUN/2025 [A] 4 “4. Assessed under section 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act at returned income of Rs.5,75,540/-. Penalty proceedings under section 271DA have been initiated through notice issued separately.” 4.1 Thus, it can be observed that in the assessment order returned income of Rs.5,75,540/- have been accepted without making any addition. 5. However, it is noted that Assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A). It has been pleaded by ld.AR for the Assessee that Assessee under wrong guidance of Tax Consultant filed appeal before ld.CIT(A). 6. We have studied the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act. In the said order, ld.CIT(A) has accepted that no capital gain was applicable on the sale of rural agricultural land. It is also noted that ld.CIT(A) had not mentioned in the order issue of any notice under section 251(2) of the Act, for any enhancement. In the order, ld.CIT(A) has not referred to Section 251 at all. Ld.CIT(A) has mentioned as under : “…………Therefore, the addition of Rs.32,73,500/- made by the AO during the assessment proceedings is upheld and grounds of appeal filed by the assessee are dismissed.” Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2410/PUN/2025 [A] 5 7. We have already mentioned that in the assessment order, returned income has been accepted without making any addition. Therefore, the observation of the ld.CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs.32,73,500/- are erroneous and unsustainable in Law. Ld.CIT(A) has not read the assessment order and merely confirmed the addition which is not mentioned in the assessment order. 8. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set-aside the order of ld.CIT(A) as it is not as per law. Accordingly, the addition of Rs.32,73,500/- is directed to be deleted. Hence, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22 December, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- VINAY BHAMORE Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पपणे / Pune; ददिधंक / Dated : 22 Dec, 2025/ SGR आदेशकीप्रनिनलनपअग्रेनषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपऩलधर्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. नवभधगऩयप्रनिनिनर्, आयकर अपऩलऩय अनर्करण, “एस एम सऩ” बेंच, पपणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गधर्ाफ़धइल / Guard File. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2410/PUN/2025 [A] 6 आदेशधिपसधर / BY ORDER, / / TRUE COPY / / Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपऩलऩय अनर्करण, पपणे/ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "