SANDIP GULAB GOGAWALE,PUNE V. ADDITIONAL JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL)-10-DELHI, DELHI

ITA 657/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sandip Gulab Gogawale against the order of the CIT(A) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which was based on an assessment order under sections 143(3) read with 147 of the Act. The dispute arose from an addition of Rs.7 lakhs made by the Assessing Officer, alleging unaccounted cash payments for a property transaction. The Assessing Officer had reopened the assessment for A.Y. 2011-12 based on information from DDIT(Investigation) regarding the purchase of a flat by the assessee. However, the Tribunal noted that the actual transaction occurred in A.Y. 2012-13, leading to the decision to allow the appeal and delete the addition.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 361362 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MADHAN THIRMANPALLIL
• Assessee Lawyers: DILIP V. SATBHAI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” Ɋायपी ठपुणेमŐ। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.657/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sandip Gulab Gogawale, 143, A/p-Gogalwadi, Taluka-Haveli, District-Pune. Maharashtra – 412205. V s The Assessing Officer, Ward-5(2), Income Tax Department, Pune. PAN: ALLPG3405D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Dilip V. Satbhai – AR Revenue by Shri Madhan Thirmanpallil – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 15/05/2025 Date of pronouncement 22/05/2025 आदेश/ ORDER PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld.CIT(A)[NFAC] under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 12.06.2024 for the A.Y.2011-12, emanating from assessment order u/s.143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Act, dated 28.12.2018. ITA No.657/PUN/2025 [A] 2 Condonation of delay : 2. There is a delay of 186 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee filed an Affidavit. The contents of he Affidavit are reproduced as under : 2.1 We find sufficient and reasonable cause for Delay, hence the delay is condone. ITA No.657/PUN/2025 [A] 3 Findings & Analysis : 3. In this case, Assessing Officer issued notice u/s.148 of the Act, dated 26.03.2018 for A.Y.2011-12, based on the information received from DDIT(Investigation), Pune regarding purchase of Flat by Assessee. The Assessing Officer has reproduced the reasons recorded for reopening in the assessment order. It is noted that Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.7 lakhs alleging that Assessee has made cash payments and assessee could not explain the source of the same. The DDIT(Investigation) has noted that assessee entered into registered sale deed on 04.05.2011 for sale of Flat No.5, Apsara Apartments, Lohegaon, Pune with Mr. Sumit Jabbal. Assessee has also filed copy of registered sale agreement with us. Thus, the sale deed took place in F.Y.2011-12, means A.Y.2012-13. However, Assessing Officer has made addition for A.Y.2011-12. The Assessing Officer has relied on a statement u/s.131 of the Act, of the Assessee recorded by DDIT(Investigation). However, Assessing Officer has not reproduced the statement in the Assessment Order. Assessing Officer has presumed that cash was paid in earlier assessment year. However, Assessee in his written submission has submitted that Rs.8 lakhs was paid in cash to Abhyuday Co-operative Bank, on 03.05.2011 where the Flat was ITA No.657/PUN/2025 [A] 4 mortgaged. Ld.DR has not rebutted these pleadings of the assessee. Assessee had also taken this plea during the assessment proceedings. However, the Assessing Officer has not bothered to verify the facts and made addition in A.Y.2011-12. 4. In these facts and circumstances of the case, since the agreement was registered in F.Y.2011-12(A.Y.2012-13), the impugned amount cannot be taxed in A.Y.2011-12. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs.7 lakhs. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 22 May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (DIPAK P.RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 22 May, 2025/ SGR आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), concerned. 4. The Pr. CIT, concerned. 5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “एस एम सी” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. ITA No.657/PUN/2025 [A] 5 आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune. "