DIPIKA JAGDISH WAGH,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD1(1),NASHIK, NASHIK
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not properly considered the assessee's submissions and evidence. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings against the assessee for AY 2013-14 based on information of undisclosed financial transactions. The AO made additions for unexplained money, disallowed expenses, and long-term capital gains. The CIT(A) sustained these additions.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) properly considered the assessee's submissions and evidence before sustaining the AO's additions, and whether a proper opportunity of being heard was provided.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 69A,Section 147,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE
Before: DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MENBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE BENCH “A” BEFORE DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MENBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.1589/PUN/2026 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dipika Jagdish Wagh, ITO, Ward-1, 14, Trimutri Chowk, KandriyaRajaswaBhavan, Nashik-422008, GadkariChowk, Maharashtra, Vs. PAN: AAVPW8084D Old Agra Road, Nashik-422002, Maharashtra.
(Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri.Ronak H jain.AR For Revenue : Shri.Rajesh Haladkar.Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 31.08.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 03.09.2026 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi passed u/sec 147 r.w.s. 144 and 144B and 250 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) in sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has filed return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14 disclosing total income of Rs. 49,88,930/-. The Assessing Officer has received information that the assessee has under taken certain financial transactions pertaining to undisclosed cash, jewellary, and sale and purchase of immovable property and was not disclosed in the return of income filed. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and with the due process of law issued notice under Section 148 of the Act on 31.03.2021. In response to notice, the assessee has filed return of income on 30.04.2021 and subsequently, notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was issued on the various dates to explain the sources of cash and jewellery and other requisite information and there was no compliance. Finally the A.O has issued a show cause notice and the assesse has filed the submissions referred at Page3 and 4 of the order. Whereas the A.O was not satisfied with the explanations and dealt on the provisions of the Act and made addition of (i)Unexplained money u/sec69A of the Act of Rs.26,58,871/-(ii) disallowance of other expenses on estimated basis of Rs.10,43,656/- and (iii) Long term capital gains on sale of immovable property of Rs.43,00,000/-. Finally assessed the total income of Rs.96,32,950/- and passed the order under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 and 144B of the I.T. Act dated 27.03.2022. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statements of facts, submissions and finding of the A.O but sustained the action of the A.O and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer, overlooking the submissions and details filed in compliance to the notices issued in the appellate proceedings and prayed for allowing the appeal. Per contra, the Ld.DR supported the order of the CIT(A).
We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole crux of the disputed issue envisaged by the Ld.AR that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the additions overlooking the factual aspects and material information filed in the hearing proceedings. The CIT(A) has not provided proper opportunity and has not considered the documents and information supporting the claim of the assesse. Prima-facie, the CIT(A) has dealt on the findings of the AO and there are no proper findings on the submissions/evidences of the assessee filed in the proceedings and has not allowed the grounds of appeal. We considering the facts, circumstances and principles of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing and accordingly set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) for afresh adjudication and the CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee to file additional evidences and the assessee should also cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal.. And the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
Order pronounced in the open Court on 03rd September, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- MANISH BORAD PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Pune; दिन ांक / Dated: 03rd September, 2026 Abhishek Digitally signed by Abhishek Mohan Abhishek Mohan Mohan Date: 2026.09.04 10:45:40 +05'30'
आिेशकीप्रतितितिअग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अिीि र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. तिभ गीयप्रतितनति,आयकरअिीिीयअतिकरण, “A” बेंच, पुणे/ DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्डफ़ इि / Guard File. 5. //True Copy//
आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, Assistant Registrar, आयकरअिीिीयअतिकरण,/ ITAT, Pune.
S.No Details Date Initials Designation 1 Draft dictated on 31.08.2026 Sr. PS/PS 01.09.2026 2 Final Draft placed before author Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the JM/AM Second Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second AM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. Sr. PS/PS 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
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Shree Construction, Khordha vs. The Principal Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Pramod Kumar Behera vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Santosh Kumar Pradhan (Late Biswabhar Pradhan) vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGST And Central Excise And Customs, BhubaneswarOrissa · 4 Nov 2026
- Mrs. Sharma Glass And Plywoods vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- Sri Mohanraj vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026