MR. BHARAT NATWARLAL DAVE,NADIAD KHEDA V. ITO WARD 1, DHULE, DHULE

ITA 288/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Bharat Natwarlal Dave, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, which confirmed the additions made by the Assessing Officer regarding unexplained income and income computed from contract receipts. The Assessing Officer had made these additions ex-parte due to the non-compliance of the assessee in responding to notices under section 148 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A)/NFAC also confirmed these additions after the assessee failed to respond to multiple opportunities. The tribunal, considering the health issues of the assessee during the proceedings and the lack of representation, decided to remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 32558 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ TRIPATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: AAKASH PARAKH; ISSUING THREE NOTICES
• Keywords: Non compliance
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 69A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.288/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Mr. Bharat Natwarlal Dave, A/5, Harikunj Society, Opp. Sanket Society, Vaishali Cinema Road, Nadiad Kheda, Gujarat- 387002. PAN : AHKPD0928P Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dhule. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM: This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 01.12.2021 passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. The assessee raised six grounds amongst which only issue emanates for our consideration is to whether the CIT(A)/NFAC justified in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer ex-parte of the assessee. Assessee by : Shri Aakash Parakh Revenue by : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date of hearing : 20.03.2025 Date of pronouncement : 28.03.2025 ITA No.288/PUN/2025 2 3. At the outset, we note that the assessee is an individual and no return of income filed. According to Assessing Officer, an information received regarding deposit of cash more than Rs.10 lakhs by the assessee in his savings bank account. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued requesting the assessee to file return of income, but, no return of income filed nor any response offered by the assessee in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act. It is noted from para no.2 of the assessment order that many opportunities were given to the assessee by issuing three notices and which clearly shows that non compliance of the assessee. Having no response from the assessee the Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained income u/s 69A of the Act and also income computed at 8% of total contract receipts with Dhruv Enterprises, thereby the Assessing Officer determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.12,66,840/- vide its order dated 24.12.2018 passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. 4. Having aggrieved by the said order of the Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC. On perusal of the impugned order, we note that the CIT(A)/NFAC has given three opportunities but no compliance made by the assessee which is clear from page no.3 of the impugned order, thereby the ITA No.288/PUN/2025 3 CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the order of Assessing Officer in the absence of any submission by the assessee. 5. Having aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before us challenging the addition of the CIT(A)/NFAC in dismissing the grounds ex-parte of assessee. 6. Ld. AR, Shri Aakas Parakh drew our attention to the notarised affidavit dated 31.01.2025 and by referring to particular para no.10 to 36 argued that the assessee was not well during the period of proceedings before CIT(A)/NFAC and also drew our attention to the medical certificate filed as Annexure, prayed to afford one more opportunity to the assessee by remanding the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC. 7. Ld. DR, Shri Manoj Tripathi raised no objection in remanding the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC. 8. Upon hearing both the parties, we note that the Assessing Officer made addition on account of unexplained money and also computed income in respect of contract receipts with Dhruv Enterprises @ 8%, in our opinion, requires assistance by the assessee in support of his contentions made before the CIT(A)/NFAC and we find no assistance from the assessee before the CIT(A)/NFAC. Therefore, having considered the submissions ITA No.288/PUN/2025 4 of Ld. AR and Ld. DR and the facts and circumstances of the case along with facts narrated above in the aforementioned paragraphs, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the file of CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh consideration. Assessee is liberty to file evidences, if any, in support of his claims. Thus, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th day of March, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 28th March, 2025. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "