NIKHIL BABAN NIMBALKAR,PUNE V. ITO, WARD 14(5), PUNE

ITA 2526/PUN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by Nikhil Baban Nimbalkar against the orders of the CIT(A), which were dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance by the assessee. The appeals pertain to the assessment years 2018-2019 and 2019-2020, where significant additions were made to the assessee's income under sections 147 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary issues contested include the validity of the assessment orders, the procedural correctness of the notices issued under section 148, and the substantive additions made to the income, particularly concerning alleged cash sales and disallowances related to capital gains.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780016 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMNATH P MURKUNDE
• Assessee Lawyers: PRATIK SANDBHOR
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Capital Gains; Principle of natural justice; Non compliance
• Section: 147; 148; 144

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \" ए \" ।येंयपीण प णी या न् 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.2525&2526/PUN/2024 धििेंारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2018-2019 & 2019-2020 Nikhil Baban Nimbalkar, Nimbalkar Hospital, Patas Road, Baramati, Pune- 413102 Maharashtra PAN-AJDPN1546Q Vs. ITO, Ward 14(5), Pune अपीलेंर्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent Assessee by: Shri Pratik Sandbhor Department by: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing: 24-09-2025 Date of Pronouncement: 06-10-2025 आदीश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 04.10.2024 which is arising out of Order passed u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act dated 29.02.2024. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 2525/PUN/2024:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Id. CIT(A) erred in not granting sufficient opportunities of hearing and dismissing the appeal ex-parte Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2525&2526/PUN/2024 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the appellant prays before the Hon'ble Bench to kindly grant an opportunity to represent the matter before the ld CIT(A). 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Assessment Order is invalid and bad in law 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Assessment Order is invalid and bad in law in as much as the notice u/s 148 has been issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in violation of the scheme w/ 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the CBDT Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29/03/2022 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in disallowing the cost of improvement of Rs 2,90,280/- in computing the capital gain on same of impugned property 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in disallowing the cost of improvement by invoking the provision of section 404(3) without taking cognizance of the fact that the said section has no applicability to computation of income under head capital gains 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred making addition of Rs 54,72,500/- as income from other sources 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs 54,72,500/- in respect of alleged receipt of cash sale consideration on sale of impugned property by ignoring the fact that the evidences relied upon by the Assessing Officer refer to the receipt of cash payment by other co-owners of the impugned property and not the appellant and therefore no addition could be made in the hands of the appellant. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs 54,72,500/- in the hands of the appellant on the basis of surmises and conjectures 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in not taking cognizance of the affidavit filed by the appellant to the effect that the impugned property was sold for consideration recorded in the sale agreement and the affidavit of the purchaser namely Mr Sumit Tilekar asserting to the fact that he did not pay any consideration in cash to the appellant Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2525&2526/PUN/2024 11. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the appellant submits that the impugned property is a rural agricultural land is not exigible to taxation 12. The above grounds of appeal may kindly be allowed to be altered, amended, modified, deleted etc in the interest of natural justice. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal in ITA No. 2526/PUN/2024:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Id. CIT(A) erred in not granting sufficient opportunities of hearing and dismissing the appeal exparte 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the appellant prays before the Hon'ble Bench to kindly grant an opportunity to represent the matter before the ld CIT(A). 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Assessment Order is invalid and bad in law 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Assessment Order is invalid and bad in law in as much as the notice u/s 148 has been issued by the jurisdictional Assessing Officer in violation of the scheme u/151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the CBDT Notification No. 18/2022 dated 29/03/2022 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Assessment Order is time barred as per provision of section 149(1)(b) in as much as the notice w's 148 has been issued beyond the period of 3 years from the end of the relevant assessment year and the income chargeable to tax escaping assessment does not exceed Rs 50 lakhs. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred making addition of Rs. 11,25,000/- as income from other sources 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs. 11,25,000/- in respect of alleged receipt of cash sale consideration on sale of impugned property by ignoring the fact that the evidences relied upon by the Assessing Officer refer to the receipt of cash payment by other co-owners of the impugned property and not the appellant and therefore no addition could be made in the hands of the appellant 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in making addition of Rs. 11,25,000/- in the hands of the appellant on the basis of surmises and conjectures 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the Assessing Officer erred in not taking cognizance of the affidavit filed by the appellant to the effect that the impugned property was sold for consideration recorded in the sale agreement and the affidavit of the purchaser namely Mr Sumit Tilekar asserting to the fact that he did not pay any consideration in cash to the appellant 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to the above grounds of appeal the appellant submits that the impugned property is a rural agricultural land is not exigible to taxation 11. The above grounds of appeal may kindly be allowed to be altered, amended, modified, deleted etc in the interest of natural justice. 3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances assessee failed to appear Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2525&2526/PUN/2024 before Ld. CIT(A) nor could submit any documentary evidence in support of its grounds of appeal. Prayer made for providing one more opportunity to go before Ld. CIT(A) for the adjudication of issues raised in the instant appeal for A.Y. 2018-19 and A.Y. 2019-20. 4. On the other hand Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld. CIT(A). 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and based on the information about alleged escapement of Income, re-assessment proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act were carried out for A.Y. 2018-19 and 2019-20 and against the returned income of Rs. 19,33,520/- and Rs. 4,10,110/-, income assessed at Rs. 76,96,300/- and Rs. 15,35,110/- for assessment year 2018-19 and A.Y. 2019- 20 respectively wherein certain additions were made. The assessee challenged the additions made for both the assessment years before Ld. CIT(A) but due to non compliance assessee’s appeals were dismissed. We however notice that Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt with the merits of the case and has dismissed the appeal for non prosecution. 6. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) Bombay (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) has held that Ld. CIT(A) NFAC is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merit even in an ex-parte order. In light of the above judgement and considering the facts and circumstances of the case we deem it appropriate to restore all the issues raised in instant two appeals by the assessee before this Tribunal, to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act for which reasonable Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.2525&2526/PUN/2024 opportunity shall be provided to the assessee to furnish the submissions/documents in support of its grounds of appeal. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be given to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No. 2525/PUN/2024 and ITA No. 2526/PUN/2024 are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 6th day of October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER प णी/ Pune; ददिेंंक /Dated: 06th October, 2025. Neeta आदीश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रीधर्ि /Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1.अपीलेंर्थी / The Appellant. 2.प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3.The Pr. CIT concerned. 4.धवभेंगीय प्रधिधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, \"A\" बाच, प णी / DR, ITAT, \"A\" Bench, Pune. 5.गेंर्ा फेंइल / Guard File. आदीशेंि सेंर / BY ORDER, Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, प णी /ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "