SHREE ANAND MANGAL VIDHYA PRASARAK MANDAL,PUNE V. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 69/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shree Anand Mangal Vidhya Pasarak Mandal, a public trust, which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, confirming a substantial addition to the taxable income for the assessment year 2011-12. The primary contention was the incorrect confirmation of a taxable income of Rs. 42,84,886 as opposed to the returned income of Rs. 3,753. The additions were made by the Assessing Officer (AO) on various counts, which the assessee argued were illegal and unsustainable. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without adequately discussing the merits and failed to consider the detailed submissions made online by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 360911 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-05-2025
• 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: INDIRA ADAKIL
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHAVIR JAIN
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Reasonable cause; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 148; 143(3)

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 AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.69/PUN/2025 धििाारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2011-2012 Shree Anand Mangal Vidhya Pasarak Mandal, S. No. 60/1/A, Behind Utkarsha Washing Center, Bijalinagar, Chinchwad, Pune-411033 Maharashtra PAN-AAJTS8143D Vs ITO, Exemption Ward 2, Pune Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Mahavir Jain Revenue by : Mrs. Indira Adakil, Additional CIT Date of hearing : 06.05.2025 Date of pronouncement : 19.05.2025 आदेश/ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the A.Y. 2011-12 is directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 14.11.2024 which in turn is arising out of order u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 dated 09.11.2018. 2. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- 1] The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has erred in confirming the taxable income of the appellant at Rs. 42,84,886/- as against returned income of Rs. 3,753/- The additions of Rs. 42,81,133/- 2 ITA No.69/PUN/2025 made by the Ld. AO on various counts is patently illegal and unsustainable in law and the same may please be deleted. 2] The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is not justified in dismissing the appeal merely on the ground that the appellant allegedly did not furnish the submission before the Ld. AD without discussing the merits of the case. 2.1] The Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC failed to appreciate that the appellant has duly furnished most of the information before the Ld. AO and that the Ld. AO is not correct in stating that no submission was made by the appellant. The Ld. AO erred in not taking cognizance of the submission of the appellant even when no assessment order was actually passed by him. 3]The Ld. AO/CIT(A) has erred in treating the amount of cash deposits as undisclosed income for the year even when it was duly accounted for the in the financials furnished during the assessment proceedings. 3.1] The Ld. AO/CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the cash was deposited out of Membership Deposits collected from proposed members which was subsequently refunded as required approval could not be obtained for the institutes of the trust. 4] The Ld. AO/CIT(A) has erred in treating the credit transactions in A/c. with Janata Sahakari Bank amounting of Rs. 4,23,410/- as \"Unexplained credit' even when it was duly accounted for in the books and was also fully explainable from the financials itself. 5] The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal. 3. At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal without examining the details filed before Ld. CIT(A) vide letter dated 08.05.2023 and Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer (AO). Prayer made to provide one more opportunity to go before the lower authorities to place the details, to explain the source of cash deposits of cash account in the assessee’s trust. 4. Ld. DR vehemently argued supporting the order of the lower authorities. 5. We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Based on the information about the credits including cash deposits in the Bank account of the assessee 3 ITA No.69/PUN/2025 which is a public trust (registered on 16.05.2008), held with Janta Sahakari Bank Ltd., and The Baramati Urban Co-op Bank Ltd., the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny proceedings. Since the assessee did not file regular return of income, assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the act were carried out and against the returned income of Rs. 3,753/- declared in the return filed in compliance to notice u/s 148 of the Act. Ld. AO made additions of Rs. 42,81,133/- Though the assessee could not place necessary details before the AO, however in the appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A) assessee furnished all the details to explain the source of alleged credits/cash deposits in the bank account and these details were filed online under the E-proceedings and the copy of the same are placed in the Paper Book from page No. 4-34. The online details filed by the assessee seems to have gone unnoticed by NFAC as the additions made by AO have been confirmed observing that the appellant did not file the necessary details. 6. We are therefore of the considered view that Ld. CIT(A) ought to have gone through the documents filed before it and should have decided the issues raised after dealing with those details and then passed a speaking order. Since this exercise has not been carried out by NFAC/Ld. CIT(A), we deem it appropriate to raise all the issues on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and also after going through the details furnished by the assessee. However Ld. CIT(A) may call for a remand report if the documents filed by the assessee are in the nature of additional evidence. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take unnecessary adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4 ITA No.69/PUN/2025 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 19th day of May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे/ Pune; दििांक / Dated: 19th May, 2025. Neeta आिेश की प्रधिधलधप अग्रेधषि / 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. "