SWARANJALI BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,SATARA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, SATARA

ITA 2963/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Swaranjali Builders and Developers, who appealed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, which confirmed an addition of Rs.1,77,20,805 made by the Assessing Officer under sections 69 and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, related to the assessment year 2016-17. The addition was based on the assessee's failure to file a return of income despite having purchased immovable property worth Rs.1,65,61,500. The Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under section 147 and issued notices under section 148, which the assessee failed to respond to, leading to the addition. The Tribunal noted that the notices were sent to an incorrect email ID, which was the reason for non-compliance, and thus decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present its case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839545 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV K SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: UMESH SAHASRABUDDHE
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 69

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.2963/PUN/2025 Assessment year : 2016-17 Swaranjali Builders and Developers Shop No.9, Near Natraj Mandir, Krushna Nagar, Satara – 415003 Vs. ITO, Ward – 2, Satara PAN: ACWFS3782P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Umesh Sahasrabuddhe Department by : Shri Gaurav K Singh, JCIT Date of hearing : 23-02-2026 Date of pronouncement : 24-02-2026 O R D E R PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 17.07.2025 of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2016-17. 2. There is a delay of 63 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the condonation application filed along with the affidavit and after hearing the Ld. DR, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2963/PUN/2025 3. Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.1,77,20,805/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. 4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that on the basis of information obtained that the assessee has purchased immovable property of Rs.1,65,61,500/- and has not filed its return of income for the impugned assessment year, the case of the assessee was reopened as per provisions of section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued and served on the assessee. Despite number of opportunities granted, there was no compliance from the side of the assessee for which the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act made addition of Rs.1,77,20,805/- u/w 69 r.w.s. 115BBE and determined the total income at Rs.1,77,20,805/-. 5. Since there was no compliance despite number of opportunities granted, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 6. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the notices were delivered in wrong e-mail ID for which the assessee could not see the notices Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2963/PUN/2025 issued by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and therefore there was no compliance from the side of the assessee. He submitted that in the interest of justice the assessee should be given an opportunity to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details. 8. The Ld. DR on the other hand strongly opposed the arguments advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee. He submitted that despite number of opportunities granted, there was no response from the side of the assessee either before the Assessing Officer or before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and therefore, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC be upheld. 9. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment on the ground that the assessee has not filed his return of income and has made investment of Rs.1,65,61,500/- towards purchase of immovable property. Since there was no compliance from the side of the assessee to the statutory notices issued by him u/s 148 as well as 142(1), therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.1,77,20,805/- u/s 69 r.w.s. 115BBE and determined the total income of the assessee at Rs.1,77,20,805/-. Since the assessee did not make any submission before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC despite number of opportunities granted, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2963/PUN/2025 of justice, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC with a direction to grant one final opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details and decide the issue as per fact and law. The assessee is also hereby directed to submit the requisite details before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC on the appointed date without seeking any adjournment under any pretext, failing which the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC is at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24th February, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (R. K. PANDA) (ASTHA CHANDRA) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे Pune; दिन ांक Dated : 24th February, 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 Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.2963/PUN/2025 S.No. Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 23.02.2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Draft placed before author 23.02.2026 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 "