VASANT DAMODAR GURAV,ATPADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5, SANGLI

PER Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi [Ld.CIT(A)], passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟) for AY 2016-17 on 08.12.2025, emanating from the Assessment Order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 09.02.2024.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated the grounds of appeal

ITA No. 529/PUN/2026

raised by the assessee. We reproduce hereunder the relevant paragraphs of the Ld. CIT(A)‟s order : “9.1 Decision of the CIT : During the appeal proceedings, Assessment order, Grounds of appeal, Facts of the case filed by the appellant are perused.

9.1 Grounds 01 to 05: During the appeal proceedings no documentary evidences have been submitted by the appellant to verify the claim in-spite of multiple opportunities being provided by this office as stated above. As evidenced from the Assessment Order, appellant miserably failed to explain satisfactorily that the source of the cash deposit amounting to Rs. 31,13,251/ for A.Y. 2016-17. The appellant had not filed or explained with any documentary evidence about the nature and source of these cash deposits, and therefore AO was having no other option otherwise by treating the above as unexplained money u/s 69A. The source of cash deposits made by the appellant remains unexplained and cannot be treated as a genuine transaction.

9.2 The appellant during the appeal proceedings also did not made any submission supporting his claims. Hence, I do not have any documentary evidences on record to provide relief to the appellant sought merely through the grounds of appeal. 9.3 In this situation, it is for the appellant to furnish submissions with relevant evidence(s), if any, to support the claim. The 'burden of proof is always on the person who makes the claim. In this case, it is the appellant who has made the claim by filing the appeal. Further, if the appellant claims that the addition made should be deleted, the burden is on the appellant to prove it why it should be deleted. Same is the position in case of all allowances, deductions, exemptions, claims or loss etc. Since an appeal is nothing but the claim of the appellant that he has been unduly unjustifiably taxed or levied fee/interest, it is for the appellant to prove its case. The appellant has not availed the opportunity given to do so by filing documentary proofs or evidences. 9.4 The appellant was given notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant neither furnished the details called for nor submitted any documentary evidences which has been clearly brought out by the AO The Assessing Officer was left with no option but to complete the assessment on the basis of material evidences gathered during the assessment proceedings. 9.5 During appellate proceedings also was no response from the appellant. The nature and source of the said cash deposits needs to be explained to the satisfaction of the assessing officer or the appellate authority. Despite posting the case several times, there was no response. I observe that the assessing officer had tangible material in his possession to form belief regarding income which had escaped assessment and there is complete lack of information/documentary evidence regarding the transactions done from the appellant's side.

ITA No. 529/PUN/2026

9.6 Even otherwise on the merits of the case also based on the available documents on record, I do not see any reason to differ with the findings of the AO, since no attempt has been made by the appellant to discharge its onus. This case is also adjudicated on merits. 9.7 In view of the above discussion, it is held that the source of cash deposited by the appellant remain unexplained and needs to be taxed in the hands of appellant. Therefore, the undersigned sees no reason to interfere with the orders of the Assessing Officer. 9.8 Hence, the Assessment Order is upheld the ground is noted as dismissed.”

4.1 Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without adjudicating the grounds of appeal which is mandatory u/s 250(6) of the Act.

4.2 The Hon‟ble Bombay High Court has held in the case of Pr.CIT(Central) Vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (Bombay) / [2017] 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) as under : Quote, “8.From the aforesaid provisions, it is very clear once an appeal is preferred before the CIT(A), then in disposing of the appeal, he is obliged to make such further inquiry that he thinks fit or direct the Assessing Officer to make further inquiry and report the result of the same to him as found in Section 250(4) of the Act. Further Section 250(6) of the Act obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of an appeal in writing after stating the points for determination and then render a decision on each of the points which arise for consideration with reasons in support. Section 251(1)(a) and (b) of the Act provide that while disposing of appeal the CIT(A) would have the power to confirm, reduce, enhance or annul an assessment and/or penalty. Besides Explanation to sub-section (2) of Section 251 of the Act also makes it clear that while considering the appeal, the CIT(A) would be entitled to consider and decide any issue arising in the proceedings before him in appeal filed for its consideration, even if the issue is not raised by the appellant in its appeal before the CIT(A). Thus once an assessee files an appeal under Section 246A of the Act, it is not open to him as of right to withdraw or not press the appeal. In fact the CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits. In fact with effect from 1st June, 2001 the power of the CIT(A) to set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restore it to the Assessing Officer for passing a fresh order stands withdrawn. Therefore, it would be noticed that the powers of the CIT(A) is coterminous with that of the Assessing Officer i.e. he can do all that Assessing Officer could do. Therefore just as it is not open to the Assessing Officer to not complete the assessment by allowing the assessee to withdraw its return of income, it is not open to the assessee in appeal to withdraw and/or the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal on account of non-prosecution of the appeal by the assessee. This is amply clear from the Section 251(1)(a) and (b) and

ITA No. 529/PUN/2026

Explanation to Section 251(2) of the Act which requires the CIT(A) to apply his mind to all the issues which arise from the impugned order before him whether or not the same has been raised by the appellant before him. Accordingly, the law does not empower the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution as is evident from the provisions of the Act.” Unquote.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 08th July, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (Dr. DIPAK P. RIPOTE) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

पुणे/Pune; दिन ांक/Dated : 08-07-2026 Ravi Kumar Digitally signed by Ravi Kumar Ravi Kumar Date: 2026.07.09 10:39:51 +05'30' आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order is forwarded to: 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent 3. The concerned Pr. CIT, Pune 4. DR, ITAT, „SMC‟ Bench, Pune 5. ग र्ड फ ईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण,पुणे / ITAT, Pune