VIVEKANAND AMBADASRAO GHODKE, AURANGABAD V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), AURANGABAD

ITA 2011/PUN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vivekanand Ambadasrao Ghodke, the appellant, who contested an addition made to his income by the Income Tax Officer under sections 147 and 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The addition was related to an incorrectly claimed exemption of Rs. 23,14,192 under 'Capital Receipt of Ex-gratia Severance Pay', of which only Rs. 5 lakh was permissible under section 10(10C). The CIT(A) initially dismissed the appeal due to non-response from the assessee, attributed to communication issues. The Tribunal, acknowledging the procedural oversight, remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 778354 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 25-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARISH BIST
• Assessee Lawyers: ARRCHENA SHETTY
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Capital receipt; Earning of tax free income

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2011/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Vivekanand Ambadasrao Ghodke, House No.593, N-2, Murthijapur, Aurangabad – 431 001 Maharashtra PAN : ATSPG9694H Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Aurangabad 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 27.06.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated 28.02.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144B of the Act. 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to the Affidavit dated 14.09.2025 given by the assessee has submitted that the notice(s) of hearing issued by ld.CIT(A) could not be responded because they were sent on email id not regularly used by the assessee and the same resulted into dismissal of Appellant by : Ms. Arrchena Shetty Respondent by : Shri Harish Bist Date of hearing : 17.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 10.10.2025 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2011/PUN/2025 Vivekanand Ambadasrao Ghodke 2 the appeal. She submitted that if an opportunity is granted the assessee assures that all relevant details shall be furnished before ld.CIT(A) in support of grounds of appeal so that necessary adjudication can be carried out by ld.CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that assessee is an individual and filed return of income u/s.139(1) as well as return in compliance to notice u/s.148 of the Act. Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) during the course of assessment proceedings observed that assessee has claimed relief u/s.89 of the Act in the return filed u/s.139(1) of the Act and afterwards wrongly claimed exemption at Rs.23,14,192/- under the head ‘Capital Receipt of Ex-gratia Severance Pay’. Ld. AO has observed that assessee at maximum can claim the deduction at Rs.5.00 lakh u/s.10(10C) of the Act and the remaining amount of Rs.18,14,192/- has been wrongly claimed as exempt income and accordingly made addition thereof. Against the returned income of Rs.26,40,760/- ld. AO made addition of Rs.18,14,192/- and assessed the income at Rs.44,54,952/-. 5. Aggrieved with the addition made by ld. AO assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but after filing of the appeal, assessee failed to respond to the notices of hearing. In the Affidavit filed before us, it has been stated that the notices issued by ld.CIT(A) were sent on the email id [e-mail] which was not regularly used by the assessee and also he was not acquainted with using and accessing of emails. Due to such non-compliance, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2011/PUN/2025 Vivekanand Ambadasrao Ghodke 3 ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal confirming the action of the Assessing Officer. 6. We however considering the contentions made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and also the contents of the Affidavit find that ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee to effectively represent the case before ld.CIT(A). Therefore, in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to provide one more opportunity to the assessee by remitting the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. Needless to mention that in the set aside proceedings ld.CIT(A) shall afford reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is directed to update latest email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is hereby set aside and 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 10th day of October, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; \u0001दनांक / Dated : 10th October, 2025. Satish Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2011/PUN/2025 Vivekanand Ambadasrao Ghodke 4 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, “SMC” ब\u0014च, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. गाड\u0004 फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune. Printed from counselvise.com "