SHARAD SUBRAO KOKATE,PUNE V. INCOME TAX AUTHORITY, PUNE

ITA 954/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Sharad Subrao Kokate, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from an assessment order under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was the exparte nature of the order and the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) due to non-submission of required details by the assessee. The ITAT noted the assessee's failure to respond adequately during both the assessment and appellate proceedings, leading to a best judgment assessment by the Assessing Officer, which included substantial additions for unexplained money and undisclosed interest income. The ITAT, considering the principles of justice and fair play, decided to remit the case back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination and a fair opportunity for the assessee to present his case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 397965 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Other Referred Cases: Nirmal Singh and Others vs. Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAKESH RANJAN
• Assessee Lawyers: GAURI S.MANJREKAR
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Onus to prove
• Section: 147; 144; 68; 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.954/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sharad Subrao Kokate, S.No.480, Near Railway Line, Kasarwadi, Pune 411 034 Maharashtra PAN : ABJPK2828G Vs. Income Tax Authority Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14 is directed against the order dated 01.04.2024 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 01.05.2023 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( in short ‘the Act’). 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned order is exparte and even though the assessee submitted few details but in the absence of filing the remaining details ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal without adjudicating on merits of the case. She further prayed that the matter may please be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) with a liberty to the assessee to file additional evidences and other necessary details in support of grounds of appeal. Appellant by : Ms. Gauri S.Manjrekar Respondent by : Shri Rakesh Ranjan Date of hearing : 03.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 03.06.2025 ITA No.954/PUN/2025 Sharad Subrao Kokate 2 3. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative though supported the orders of the lower authorities further stated that even before the Assessing Officer assessee has not appeared resulting into best judgment assessment. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Assessee is an individual and running a business concern namely Brazewell Engineers. Income of Rs.37,37,840/- declared in the return of income for A.Y. 2013-14 furnished on 27.09.2013 which was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act vide order dated 27.03.2015. Subsequently, based upon the information about large amount credited in assessee’s bank account held with Saraswar Bank, Pimple Saudagar, Pune ld. AO firstly issued notice u/s.133(6) of the Act requiring to furnish information about the sources of credits of Rs.1,57,75,165/-, sources of other deposits of Rs.20,78,751/- and also the sources of interest income amounting to Rs.70,658/- but assessee failed to respond. Ld. AO thereafter carried out the re-assessment proceedings u/s.147 of the Act after validly serving statutory notices but on account of non-compliance, completed the proceedings by passing a best judgment assessment making addition of Rs.1,75,78,751/- for unexplained money and addition for undisclosed interest income of Rs.35,956/- and assessed the income at Rs.2,13,52,547/-. 5. Assessee challenged the additions made by AO in the appeal filed before the First Appellate Authority but on the different dates of hearing fixed by ld.CIT(A) on ten occasions, on most of the dates assessee has not responded and on few requested for adjournment. Even though before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated that few details were furnished, however, on ITA No.954/PUN/2025 Sharad Subrao Kokate 3 going through the impugned order, we find that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal for want of proper response and furnishing of necessary details discharging the burden of proof. Para 7.5 to para 7.7 of the impugned is reproduced below : “7.5 Accordingly, applying the judicial principles outlined in the earlier paragraphs to the facts of the case it is seen that the primary onus to prove the source of the money and necessary evidences to support credit entries u/s 68 or section 69 of the Act is on the appellant. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has further held that explanation offered by the appellant should be carefully examined by the AO to ascertain whether all the ingredients of the onus are proved by the appellant or not. The appellant is required to discharge the onus by producing evidence and an explanation that are comprehensive and accurate. In this case it is seen that no explanation has been provided by the appellant either during the assessment proceedings or during the appellate proceedings. The contentions of the appellant raised in the ground of appeal is not supported by any evidence or documents. 7.6 Inspite of numerous opportunities given, the appellant has not responded to any of the notices issued in the appellate proceedings. Accordingly, it is clear that the appellant has not discharged the burden of proof as required under the respective provisions to explain the source of the credit in the bank account. Hence, the Grounds of Appeal are Not Allowed. 7.7 In view of the discussion in the preceding paragraphs, I am constrained to concur with the AO's findings of fact and decisions thereof, more particularly in the absence of any meaningful and worthwhile submissions/ documentations even during the instant appellate proceedings, to counter effectively the position adopted by the AO on the concerned issues and reduced in writing in the assessment order. It is trite that an appellate authority is essentially called upon to balance the two sides of an argument presented before him as held in Nirmal Singh and Others of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court (Cr No. 3791 of 2013 (O&M) dated 01.05.2014] and in the absence of any reasonable, cogent and valid arguments/contentions advanced by the appellant in the instant appeal to counter the AO's decision, the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act dated 01.05.2023 is upheld. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed.” 6. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has requested for restoring the issues back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for making necessary compliance. Considering the prayer of the assessee and in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the ITA No.954/PUN/2025 Sharad Subrao Kokate 4 parties, we deem it appropriate to remit the issues raised on merit to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Assessee is at liberty to adduce any evidence as deems expedient. Ld.CIT(A), if necessary, may call for a remand report from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and after taking the objections from the assessee, shall pass a speaking order in accordance with law. Needless to say that assessee shall be afforded reasonable opportunity of hearing. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 03rd day of June, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 03rd June, 2025. Satish आदेश क\u0002 \u0003ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. \u000eयथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "