SACHIN JADHAV,PUNE V. ITO WARD 2(2), PUNE

ITA 941/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sachin Jadhav, an individual who filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which affirmed the addition of Rs. 10,11,177 as unexplained credit to his income for the assessment year 2017-18. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to the assessee's failure to explain the source of a credit deposit. The CIT(A) upheld this addition after the assessee failed to respond to hearing notices. The ITAT, considering the circumstances including the COVID-19 pandemic and the non-appearance of the assessee at earlier hearings, decided to remand the case back to the JAO for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee to present his explanations and documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775884 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 07-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANOJ TRIPATHI
• Assessee Lawyers: SACHIN JADHAV
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 142(1); 68

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण \" एस एम सी \"न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL \"SMC\" BENCH, PUNE BEFORE Dr. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं / ITA No.941/PUN/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Sachin Jadhav, Row House No.2, Omkar Apartments, Vidnyan Nagar, Bavdhan, Khurd, Pune-411021 Maharashtra PAN-ASYPJ2913P Vs ITO Ward-2(2), Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sachin Jadhav (Assessee) Revenue by : Shri Manoj Tripathi (through virtual) Date of hearing : 08.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 12.09.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :- This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 07.02.2025 framed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and declared income of Rs. 1,87,960/- filed on 19.09.2017 which was selected for scrutiny through CASS by valid serving of notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. After going through the details furnished during the course of assessment proceedings Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) observed that assessee has not explained the source of credit deposit amounting to Rs. 10,11,177/- and accordingly made the addition for the said amount and assessed income at Rs. 11,99,140/- Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.941/PUN/2025 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A). However assessee failed to respond to the notices of hearing as a result Ld. CIT(A) affirmed the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. Aggrieved assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal raising various grounds of appeal challenging the addition made by Ld. CIT(A) at Rs. 10,11,177/- 4. During the course of hearing the assessee was himself present before this Tribunal and he submitted that he possess complete details to explain the source of alleged credit which mainly include reimbursement of expenses at Rs. 1,53,024/-, Rs. 3,50,000/- received from Mr. Laxman Sandipan Pawar, Rs. 2,77,000/- received from sale of jewellery, Rs. 35,486/- received from Aspire Home Finance now known as Motilal Oswal, Rs. 42,092/- received from Teamless Services and Rs. 22,360/- from Kokuyo Camlin Ltd. And Rs. 20,000/- as withdrawal from Bank Account. He submitted that given an opportunity he shall file all these details before the Assessing Officer (AO). He also submitted that all these details stands duly enclosed with the appeal set running from page 27 to 56. 5. On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently argued supporting the orders of the lower authorities. 6. I have heard rival contentions and perused the records placed before me. I note that the assessee is an individual and his main source of Income is from salary received from MSWIPE Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Ld. AO has made additions u/s 68 as unexplained credit at Rs. 10,11,177/- In the appellant proceedings before Ld. CIT(A), assessee failed to appear and one of the reason for non appearance is that notice of hearing were mostly given during the Covid-19 Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.941/PUN/2025 pandemic restriction period. Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for non appearance and affirmed the addition before him. The assessee has referred to various details placed on record and has submitted that the source of alleged credits is mainly from sale of gold jewellery, loans from relatives, reimbursement of travelling allowance, other minor credits from past deposits and withdrawal from Bank. I note that the assessee has furnished requisite details which seems to have not been filed before the lower authorities. 7. Therefore considering the facts that assessee failed to appear before Ld. CIT(A) and also failed to furnish the details to Ld. AO, in the interest of justice and being fair to both the parties I deem it appropriate to restore the issues raised on merits in the instant appeal to the file of Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for denovo adjudication. 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 are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 12th day of September, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक / Dated: 12th September, 2025. Neeta Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.941/PUN/2025 आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधर्ि / 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, \"SMC\" बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, \"SMC\" Bench, Pune. 5. गार्ा फाइल / Guard File. आिेशािुसार / BY ORDER, Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune Printed from counselvise.com "