MOHAMMED SALEEM MOHAMMED ALI BEPARI,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA V. ASSESSING OFFICER, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA

ITA 2145/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Mohammed Saleem Mohammed Ali Bepari against the order of the CIT Appeal (NFAC) under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which arose from an order passed under sections 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act. The primary contention was regarding the applicability of section 69A and the issuance of notice under section 148 after the lapse of four years from the end of the relevant Assessment Year, specifically A.Y. 2013-14, where the total income was below Rs. 50,00,000. The assessee argued that he had provided sufficient explanation and documentary evidence for financial transactions during FY 2012-13, which was not considered by the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal noted that the details submitted by the assessee were not considered by the AO and thus decided to restore the matter for fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 469586 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHILPA N C; ADDITIONAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAHUL KAVALE
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Salary income
• Section: 250; 69A

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \"ए\" न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"A\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2145/PUN/2024 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2013-2014 Mohammed Saleem Mohammed Ali Bepari, 56, Shalimar Garden Housing Society, 29 Aundh Road, Kirkee, Pune- 411003 Maharashtra PAN-AIEPB6925F Vs. Assessing Officer, Ward 13(1), Pune अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by: CA Rahul Kavale Department by: Ms Shilpa N C, Additional- CIT Date of hearing: 21-01-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 04-04-2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT Appeal (NFAC) u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 08.09.2023 which is arising out of Order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 26.09.2022 framed by ITO assessment unit. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1. Provisions of Sec 69A will not be applicable here, as the appellant is able to provide all the explanation akong with the supporting documentary evidence for francial transactions made during the FY 2012-13 2. As per see 149(1)(a), netice n's 148 cannot be issued after lapse of four years from the end of relevant Assessment Year, if the total income is Below Rs. 50,00,000 3.As por see 139(1), the filing of Income Tax Return is mandatory only when the total income exceeds maximum amount which is not chargeable to tax ie, Rs. 2,50,000/- 2 ITA No.2145/PUN/2024 3. So far as legal issue raised by the assessee in ground No. 2 that notice u/s 148 of the Act cannot be issued after lapse of 4 years from the end of relevant Assessment Year which is A.Y. 2013-14, if the total income is below Rs. 50,00,000/- we notice that this ground raised by the assessee has no legs to stand because firstly assessee did not file return of income and secondly the disputed amount alleged to have escaped tax is Rs. 2,87,09,413/- (mentioned at Para 2.1 of the Assessment Order) and therefore since the income alleged to have escaped is more than Rs. 50,00,000/-, the notice u/s 148 issued in the instant case is valid and within the prescribed time. Thus ground No. 2 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 4. As regards grounds on merit, ground No. 1, at the outset Ld. counsel of the assessee claimed to have submitted all necessary details to explain alleged transaction of making investment in purchase of immovable property to Learned Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (Ld. JAO). However submission filed on 18.05.2023 to Ld. AO has not been considered and therefore prayer is made for restoring the issue on merit to the file of Ld. JAO. 5. Ld. DR was fair enough in not opposing this request. 6. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We note that the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act to carry out the assessment proceedings for examining the transaction of purchase of immovable property amounting Rs. 2.80 crores and also salary income of Rs. 70,010/- and the contract amount of Rs. 6,39,403/- Before us the assessee has furnished Paper Book running into 106 pages as well as covering letter stating that the alleged transaction of immovable property is not carried out in its personal capacity. He 3 ITA No.2145/PUN/2024 submitted that the assessee is only a Secretary in new Kolhapur Co-operative Bank and only his PAN was given for opening his Bank Account. Reference was also made to the Bank Statement placed at Page No. 60-61. He also submitted that complete details were filed before the AO on 18.05.2023 alongwith the news paper cutting, covering letter, requisite order from TAIN to society, society resolution, sale deed and Bank statement. This fact of filing the above details is duly verifiable from the e- proceedings Portal Sheet filed before us. We further note that in Para 2.6 of the Assessment Order, Ld. AO observed that the assessee has not made any submission in response to the letter issued. This apparently shows that details furnished by the assessee have not been considered by the AO and went unnoticed before making the impugned addition. Under these given facts and circumstances we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised on merits to the file of Ld. JAO for “De novo” adjudication which has to be carried out after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to assist and after duly examining the details filed before him and then decide in accordance with law. The assessee is also advised to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless required for reasonable cause and also update the correct e- mail Id and mobile no. on the Income Tax Portal. Ground No. 1 is allowed for statistical purposes. Ground No. 3 is general and consequential in nature which needs no adjudication. 7. In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 04th day of April, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 4 ITA No.2145/PUN/2024 पुणे/ Pune; ददिांक / Dated: 04th April, 2025. Neeta आदेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधषि / Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. धवभागीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"A\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"A\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "