SANDIP KAILASAPPA LAKADE,PARBHANI V. ITO, WARD, RANGE-27, HINGOLI, HINGOLI

ITA 304/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sandip Kailasappa Lakade, who appealed against the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi, which upheld the validity of reassessment proceedings and confirmed the addition of Rs.1,55,38,905 as unexplained money. The reassessment was triggered by substantial cash deposits in Lakade's bank account, which the Assessing Officer deemed unexplained. Lakade contested the reassessment, arguing that it was beyond the permissible time limit and that his income was below Rs.50 lakhs, thus not subject to such proceedings. However, the Tribunal found that the income exceeded Rs.50 lakhs and the reassessment was conducted within the legal framework, leading to the dismissal of Lakade's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 831307 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-02-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Union of India vs. Ashish Agrawal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISH MEHTA
• Keywords: Competent authority; Co-operative Credit Society
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 142(1)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.304/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2016-17 Sandip Kailasappa Lakade MS Shivkrupa Traders, in front of Police Quarters, Yeldari Road, Jintur, Dist. Partbhani, Maharashtra – 431509 Vs. ITO, Ward Range 27, Hingoli. PAN: AILPL6025B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Department by : Shri Manish Mehta, Addl.CIT Date of hearing : 19-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 19-01-2026 O R D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.11.2024 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2016-17. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing. It was seen from the order sheet entries that in the earlier occasions also no one was appearing on behalf of the assessee. Under these circumstances, we deem it proper to decide the appeal on the basis of material available on record and after hearing the Ld. DR. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.304/PUN/2025 3. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in upholding the validity of re-assessment proceedings and thereby confirming the addition of Rs.1,55,38,905/- made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has filed his original return of income on 20.12.2016 in ITR-4S. Therefore, the same was treated as invalid by the CPC. Subsequently on the basis of information available with the Assessing Officer that the assessee has deposited huge cash to the tune of Rs.1,55,38,905/- in the bank account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd during the year under consideration, the Assessing Officer, following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Ashish Agrawal vide Civil Appeal No.3005/2022, order dated 04.05.2022, issued notice u/s 148A of the Act. Subsequently he passed an order u/s 148A(d) of the Act and issued notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 27.07.2022. The assessee in response to the same filed his return of income on 27.08.2022 declaring total income of Rs.6,42,330/-. The Assessing Officer thereafter issued statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. However, the assessee did not file any submission in response to the same. The Assessing Officer thereafter issued a show cause notice asking the assessee to explain as to why the order should not be passed ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.304/PUN/2025 Despite this, there was no submission filed by the assessee. The Assessing Officer therefore completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act and made addition of Rs.1,55,38,905/- to the total income of the assessee being the unexplained money u/s 69A of the Act. 5. Before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee argued that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued beyond 3 years and the income of the assessee is below Rs.50 lakhs and therefore, such reopening of the assessment is invalid. However, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC noted that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued after obtaining the approval of the competent authority well within time. Prior to the reopening of the assessment of the assessee, the Assessing Officer has taken all the legal steps before initiating action in terms of section 147 / 148. He therefore, rejected the grounds raised by the assessee challenging the validity of re-assessment proceedings. Since there was no argument on merit of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC did not adjudicate the same. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds: 1. The Ld. Assessing Officer is not justified in making addition of entire cash deposits as income, as the cash represented the sales in the course of business and also peak cash deposits. 2. Considering the facts of the case and the law, the Ld. Assessing Officer has issued notice beyond the time limit allowed under the law, as the income of the appellant is below Rs.50,00,000/-. Hence the Ld. Assessing Officer did not have jurisdiction to issue the notice under section 147 r.w.s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.304/PUN/2025 3. The assessee craves to add, delete, alter, modify, withdraw any of the grounds before or at the time of hearing of the appeal. 7. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the record. It is an admitted fact that due to non-submission of any details regarding the source of cash deposited in the bank account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co- operative Credit Society Ltd, the Assessing Officer, invoking the provisions of section 69A of the Act, made addition of Rs.1,55,38,905/-. We find the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC challenged the validity of re-assessment proceedings on the ground that the escaped income of the assessee is below Rs.50 lakhs and since the notice u/s 148 of the Act is issued beyond a period of 3 years from the end of the relevant assessment year. Therefore, such re-assessment proceedings are not in accordance with law. However, no argument on merit of the case was raised as appears from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the Assessing Officer has reopened the case for escapement of income to the tune of Rs.1,55,38,905/- which is more than Rs.50 lakhs. Therefore, the ground raised by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC as well as before the Tribunal is liable to be quashed since the escapement of income is more than Rs.50 lakhs. Since no details were available regarding the source of deposit of Rs.1,55,38,905/- being the cash deposit in the bank account maintained with M/s. Shri Renuka Mata Multi State Urban Co-operative Credit Society Ltd, therefore, the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A of the Act is justified. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.304/PUN/2025 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 19th January, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (R. K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 19th January, 2026 GCVSR आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant; 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. 4. The concerned Pr.CIT, Pune DR, ITAT, ‘B’ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण ,पुणे / ITAT, Pune S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 19.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 19.01.2026 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second Member JM/AM 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second Member AM/AM 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Office Superintendent 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order Printed from counselvise.com "