SHIVRAJ SHANKAR GUNDEWADI,MIRAJ V. NFAC, DELHI

ITA 525/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shivraj Shankar Gundewadi, the appellant, who faced reassessment proceedings for the Assessment Year 2017-18, resulting in a best judgement assessment by the ITO, NFAC, Delhi, adding Rs.12,53,560 as unexplained money under sections 69 and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A)/NFAC was initially condoned for delay but was later dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with hearing notices. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not address the merits of the case and thus remitted the matter back for a detailed examination, allowing the assessee to present necessary documents and explanations regarding the cash deposits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669056 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Other Referred Cases: Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) INSC 382
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S. SADANANDA SINGH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause; Reassessment proceedings
• Section: 147; 144; 69

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.525/PUN/2025 िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shivraj Shankar Gundewadi, At Post Salgare, Tal.- Miraj, Pin Code- 416418. PAN : AJDPG2612C Vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER MANISH BORAD, AM: This appeal filed at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 21.11.2023 which is arising out of the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B of the Act for Assessment Year 2017-18 framed on 30.03.2022 by the ITO, NFAC, Delhi. 2. When the case was called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee. In the past also on the dates of hearing fixed on 02.04.2025 and 20.05.2025 even after validly serving of notice of hearing, none appeared physically/virtually. I therefore proceed to deal with the appeal. Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri S. Sadananda Singh Date of hearing : 18.06.2025 Date of pronouncement : 23.06.2025 ITA No.525/PUN/2025 2 3. Registry informed that the appeal is delayed by 400 days. Application for condonation of delay has been filed. On perusal of the same, I notice that the main reason for delay is that the consultant who was looking after the appellate work before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and whose e-mail ID was given in Form 35 has received the order on 22.11.2023 but he did not inform the assessee and forwarded the order to the present tax consultant of the assessee on 21.02.2025. It is an admitted fact that the assessee’s are dependent upon the tax consultant and for the delay on their part, the assessee should not suffer. Therefore, in the larger interest of justice and also following the recent judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2025) INSC 382 dated 21.03.2025 I hereby condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 4. With the assistance of Ld. Departmental Representative I have perused the record and find that the assessee, who is an individual, was subject to reassessment proceedings for A.Y. 2017-18 but even after validly serving statutory notices, assessee failed to appear resulting into best judgement assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer and addition of Rs.12,53,560/- made for unexplained money u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. ITA No.525/PUN/2025 3 5. Aggrieved the assessee has preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with the delay but the same was condoned by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. But subsequently no compliance made to the notices of hearing issued by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and no written submissions filed, thus he framed the order ex-parte. I observe that the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has not dealt with merits of the case and summarily dismissed the appeal for lack of evidence to be tendered by the assessee. In the statement of facts filed before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, the assessee has claimed that he is a proprietor of Matoshri Krushi Seva Kendra and is engaged in the business of petrol pump activity at Salgare. He also stated that books of accounts are duly audited and audit report has been uploaded and source of alleged cash is the cash sales of the petrol pump deposited in the bank regularly. Considering these facts, I deem it appropriate to remit back the issue to the file of Ld. JAO, before whom the assessee shall furnish all relevant details including the proof of running petrol pump, details of cash sales, copy of bank statements and all other relevant documents required to explain the alleged cash deposits. Needless to mention that fair and proper opportunity shall be granted to the assessee for making necessary compliance. The assessee is also directed to furnish latest e-mail ID and contact ITA No.525/PUN/2025 4 details on the income tax portal and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. All the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 23rd day of June, 2025. Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 23rd June, 2025. Sujeet 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, “SMC” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. "