TOUSIF NABILAL TAMBOLI,SANGLI V. CIT (A), NFAC, DELHI

ITA 2403/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Tousif Nabilal Tamboli, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi, which was based on an assessment order declaring unexplained cash deposits and interest income as unexplained money under sections 69A and 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was the non-participation of the assessee in the initial proceedings and the subsequent dismissal of his appeal by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee's participation and decided to remand the case for a fresh assessment, allowing the assessee to present his explanations and documents.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840376 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 16-10-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRAMOD SHAHAKAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 142(1)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2403/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Tousif Nabilal Tamboli, Near Petrol Pump, Chikurde, Walwa, Sangli 415 412 Maharashtra PAN : AMCPT5703B Vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2019-20 is directed against the order dated 26.06.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 10.02.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’). 2. When the case called for none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite service of notice of hearing. We therefore proceed to adjudicate the appeal exparte qua assessee with the assistance of ld. Departmental Representative and the material available on record. Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Pramod Shahakar Date of hearing : 09.02.2026 Date of pronouncement : 23.02.2026 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2403/PUN/2025 Tousif Nabilal Tamboli 2 3. Registry has pointed out that the appeal is barred by limitation by 46 days as the assessee has filed the appeal before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed application for condonation stating that there was a failure on the part of the Tax consultant to comply with the notices causing the delay. Ld. DR on the other hand raised objection to delay condonation. We however considering the reason stated by the assessee and also taking justice oriented approach find that the delay is not intentional and assessee has not gained anything by filing the appeal with delay. We therefore placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condone the delay of 46 days before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. We have heard the ld. DR and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual and no regular return of income has been filed for A.Y. 2019-20. Based on the information with the department that income escaped assessment, case reopened and proceedings u/s.147 of the Act carried out. Statutory notices u/s.148 and 142(1) of the Act were issued and there was no compliance from the side of assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer observed that the assessee deposited cash to the tune of Rs.3,38,72,590/- in his savings account held with Bank of India, Kolhapur Branch and has also received interest of Rs.2,428/-. Since the assessee has not filed the return of income for the assessment year under consideration and has not responded to the various issues, ld. Assessing Officer concluded the assessment proceedings Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2403/PUN/2025 Tousif Nabilal Tamboli 3 u/s.144 of the Act treating the said cash deposit of Rs.3,38,72,590 and interest income of Rs.2,428/- as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act r.w.s.115BBE of the Act. Assessed income at Rs.3,38,75,018/-. 5. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) and ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution observing as under : “5.4 It is now a well settled principles which find its expression in the latin maxim \"Vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt\". It means that the law assists those who are vigilant about their rights and not those sleep over their rights. This maxim and guiding principle have been affirmed and reaffirmed in various higher courts, including in the Supreme Court of India in innumerable cases. Clearly, the present case also falls squarely in that category as despite getting various opportunities to present his case, the appellant has failed to respond or to make any submission. 5.5 Thus, it is very clear form the above table that the appellant has chosen not to submit anything in support of his various grounds of appeal. In such a scenario, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant does not have anything to say or have anything to offer to the appellate authority in support of his various grounds of appeal, and thus, that the appellant does not want to press any of the grounds of appeal. In absence of any material, arguments or submission from the appellant, I am left with the documents and facts available on record to base my judgement. And these are primarily the assessment order passed by the AO. Accordingly, after due and careful consideration of the matter, I do not see any reason to interfere with the findings of the AO as enumerated in the assessment order. 5.6 I, therefore, dismiss all the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee. 5.7 In the result, the appeal is dismissed.” 6. Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal challenging the impugned exparte order passed by ld.CIT(A). 7. We have perused the impugned orders passed by the ld. Assessing Officer and the ld.CIT(A). It is evident that the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2403/PUN/2025 Tousif Nabilal Tamboli 4 assessee has neither participated in the proceedings before ld. Assessing Officer nor before ld.CIT(A). By way of grounds of appeal, assessee is claiming that assessee’s father is running a petrol pump under the name Tamboli Auto Services and sale proceeds/cash of said petrol pump are deposited in assessee’s bank account. Further, the actual cash deposits are only Rs.74,35,840/- and not Rs.3,38,75,018/- as alleged by the ld. Assessing Officer. Books of accounts are duly audited and assessee possesses profit and loss account, balance sheet and other details to explain the source of alleged cash deposit. 8. We note that vide Ground No.4, assessee is seeking restoration of appeal back to the lower authorities for readjudication which reads as under : “4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities have erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without giving proper opportunity of hearing and the act being in violation of principle of natural justice, it is prayed that appeal may kindly be restored back to lower authorities A.O.) for readjudication/reconsideration.” 9. In the backdrop of above facts and circumstances, we in the larger interest of justice deem it appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.JAO in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee and decide the issues in accordance with law. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and make satisfactory compliance to the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.JAO and should refrain from taking adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2403/PUN/2025 Tousif Nabilal Tamboli 5 Effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 23rd day of February, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 23rd February, 2026. Satish आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “B” बेंच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. 5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, / True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "