PRAGARAM DEVASI,BHOSARI, PUNE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 8(1) PUNE, AKURDI

ITA 1048/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Pragaram Devasi against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, which confirmed the addition of Rs.1,10,33,133 as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The addition was based on deposits made in an account with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd., which were not disclosed in the assessee's return. The assessee contended that the notice under section 148 was legally invalid as it was based on information from a third party and that the reassessment under section 147 was consequently void. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not considered the assessee's online submission made on the date of the hearing, leading to the decision to set aside the ex-parte order and remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 714618 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Vijaykumar Mangilaji Chordiya vs. NFAC Delhi, Sejal Jewellary and Anr. vs. Union of India and Ors., Shri Karshni Metals Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, Warm Forgings P. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Neelesh Barani vs. CIT, Sr. Cold Storage vs. UOI
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT BOBDE
• Assessee Lawyers: KRISHNA V. GUJARATHI
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Corroborative evidences; Tangible material; Co-operative Credit Society
• Section: 147; 148; 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Pragaram Devasi, M/s. Mataji Steel Iorporat Ghat No.46, S. Block, MIDC, Bhosari, Pune- 411039. PAN : BHUPD7579K Vs. ITO, Ward-8(1), Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.02.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The CIT (A) erred and is not justified in confirming the addition made by the learned AO without appreciating the facts of the case that the notice issued u/s 148 is legally invalid, as the learned AO lacked jurisdiction to reopen the appellant's case u/s 148 based on information obtained during search of a third party. Therefore, consequential reassessment u/s 147 should be Assessee by : Shri Krishna V. Gujarathi Revenue by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 04.08.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 2 declared null and void. The appellant hereby prays that the addition may please be deleted. 2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, honorable CIT(A) is erred and is not justified in making the addition of Rs.1.10.33,133/- without considering the submission made by the appellant within due date and passing an ex-party order u/s 250. The appellant hereby prays that the addition may please be deleted. 3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition made by the learned assessing officer of Rs.1,10,33,133/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the I. T. Act without appreciating the facts of the case in proper perspective. The appellant hereby prays that the addition may please be deleted. 4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, without prejudice to the grounds of appeal 1,2 and 3, your honour is requested to take a reasonable percentage i.e. 0.25% of total deposits in the Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co- operative Credit society as income of the appellant for the assessment year under consideration and delete the addition of Rs. 1,10,33,133/- made u/s 69A of the Act. 5) The appellant hereby reserves the right to add, amend, alter, delete or raise any additional ground of appeal.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has furnished his return of income declaring income of Rs.3,18,400/-. Subsequently, on the basis of information available with the Department that the assessee has opened and operated the account with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co- operative Credit Society Ltd., and has made deposit of Rs.1,10,33,133/- during the period under consideration but no such transaction was disclosed in the return of income furnished by the assessee, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 3 Act and notice u/s 148 was issued to the assessee. Notice u/s 142(1) was also issued to the assessee and it was requested by the AO to submit the details and documents for verification of the genuineness of transactions and it was also requested to furnish computation of total income trading and profit and loss account and balance-sheet and bank statement etc. Subsequently, another notice u/s 142(1) was also issued to the assessee, however it was returned back with postal remark “insufficient address”. The assessee neither furnished return of income in compliance to notice issued u/s 148 of the IT Act nor made any compliance in response to notice u/s 142(1) of the IT Act. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings ex-parte u/s 147/144/144B of the IT Act and determined the taxable income at Rs.1,13,51,533/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.3,18,400/-. The above assessed income includes unexplained money u/s 69A of the IT Act Rs.1,10,33,133/- deposited in the account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd. 4. Against the above ex-parte assessment order, the assessee preferred appeal before first appellate authority. Since the assessee Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 4 remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by observing as under :- “6.4 After due consideration of all the facts available on record, the additions of Rs.1,10,33,133 are upheld as the appellant has failed to explain the nature and source of the credits and hence did not discharge the burden casted upon him. The appellant's grounds are found to be untenable due to the fact that specific findings in the assessment order have not been controverted by the appellant along with corroborative evidences. The arguments advanced by the appellant in his statement of facts and ground of appeal are also not supported by tangible materials. 6.5 The appellant's contentions are not acceptable in the absence of written submission to substantiate its contentions made in the grounds of appeal and non-submission of any material in the course of the appellate proceedings to controvert the findings in the assessment order by the AO to arrive at his decision on the issues. 6.6 Based on the facts mentioned above, and detailed discussion in the assessment order by the AO, I am not inclined to Interfere with the decision of the AO on the issues raised in the grounds of appeal. 7. The appellant hereby reserves the right to add, amend, alter, delete, or raise any additional ground/s on or before the hearing of the appeal. However, no such option was exercised by the appellant during the appellate proceedings. Hence, this ground is dismissed. 8. In the result, the appeal is Dismissed.” 5. Ld. AR appearing from side of the assessee submitted before us that the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. It was submitted by Ld. AR that the last notice of appeal hearing was issued on 19.02.2025 wherein the date of hearing was fixed on 25.02.2025 and the assessee accordingly furnished online written submission along with additional ground of appeal which was legal in nature on the income tax portal on Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 5 25.02.2025 and the acknowledgement of which is also attached with the paper book. Accordingly, Ld. AR requested before the bench to set-aside the ex-parte appellate order and further requested to allow the grounds of appeal in his favour and to delete the addition made by the AO. In support of its contentions, Ld. AR relied on the following Judgements/ decisions :- (i) Vijaykumar Mangilaji Chordiya vs. NFAC Delhi (ITA No.1075/PUN/2024 (ITAT Pune). (ii) Sejal Jewellary and Anr. vs. Union of India and Ors. (2025:BHC-OS:2735) (Bombay HC). (iii) Shri Karshni Metals Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO, ITA No.5079/Del/2019. (iv) Warm Forgings P. Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITA No.1148/Del/2019. (v) Neelesh Barani vs. CIT, ITA No.612/Mum/2020. (vi) Sr. Cold Storage vs. UOI, 448 ITR 37 (Allahabad HC). 6. Ld. DR appearing from side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. 7. We have heard Ld. counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the two paper books factual and legal furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that the order of assessment was passed ex-parte u/s 147/144/144B of the IT Act and the first appellate order was also passed ex-parte since according to Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, the assessee failed to furnish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 6 any supporting tangible material in support of grounds of appeal and statement of facts. However, we find that the assessee complied to the last notice issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC wherein date of hearing was fixed for 25.02.2025. The copy of online response acknowledgement dated 25.02.2005 along with copy of written submission wherein additional ground which was legal in nature was raised is produced before the bench. It is apparent that the assessee furnished online response on 25.02.2025 to the notice issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, and Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC without considering the same decided the appeal ex-parte vide order dated 27.02.2025, may be due to some technical glitch on the portal. Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we find force in the arguments of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is not correct, since the online response furnished by the assessee was not considered by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC which was already furnished on the scheduled date of hearing i.e. two days prior to the date of ex-parte appellate order. Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to him with a direction to decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law after providing Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 7 reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is also directed to decide the additional ground raised by the assesse. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC in this regard and to produce documents additional evidences & written submissions in support of its contentions, without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Accordingly, ground no.2 of appeal is partly allowed. Other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are not adjudicated since the exparte order passed by LD CIT(A)/ NFAC is set aside & the matter has been remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC to decide the appeal afresh as per fact and law. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 04th day of August, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 04th August, 2025. Sujeet Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1048/PUN/2025 8 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, “B” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "