INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANVEL vs. SANJAY DEVIDASRAO MAHULKAR, PANVEL, DIST. RAIGAD

The brief facts of the case are that, the Income Tax Department through ITBA data analysis found that the assessee has purchased the immovable property in the FY 2013-14 for Rs. 2,08,80,000/- and that assessee has not filed return of income for the AY 2014-15. The Assessing Officer (A.O) has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148 of the Act. In compliance to the notice, the assessee has filed the return of income on 08.08.2022 disclosing a total income of Rs. 2,17,520/-. Subsequently, the AO has issued notice u/sec 143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act on various dates and the assessee has filed the partial information on 19.04.2023. The AO has dealt on the submissions and issued a show cause notice and reply was filed on 05.05.2023. Whereas the AO was not satisfied with the explanations as the assessee has not submitted details of purchase deed and the sources in support of the purchase of the property. The assessee was also provided video conferencing opportunity for personal hearing but has not availed the facility. Finally, the AO considered the purchase of the immovable property as unexplained investment u/sec 69 of the Act of Rs.2,08,80,000/- and assessed the total income of Rs. 2,10,97,520/- and passed the order u/sec147 r.w.s144B of the Act dated 26.05.2023. 3. Aggrieved by the order CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeal with the CIT(A). Whereas the CIT(A) has considered the grounds of appeal, statements of facts, findings of the assessing officer and submissions of the assessee with the additional information

We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole matrix of the disputed issue envisaged with Ld. DR that the CIT(A) has dealt on the evidences filed by the assessee and which was not examined by the assessing officer. Further the CIT(A) has not called for the comments of the AO/Remand report on the material evidences filed for the first time before the appellate authority and there is violations of provisions under Rule 46A(3) of the I T Rules. The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has complied with the information before the lower authorities. Whereas on perusal of the assessment order, the assessee has complied with part information on 19.04.2023 in compliance to notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act and on line reply was filed in lieu of show cause notice on 05.05.2023 by the assessee without any supporting documents and also at the request of the assessee, opportunity of video conferencing was provided and the video facility was not availed by the assessee dealt at Para 5 of the 4 Sanjay Devidasrao Mahulkar assessment order. Hence,considering the facts, circumstances and to meet the ends of justice, we restore the disputed issue along with the additional evidence filed by the assessee with the CIT(A) to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine and adjudicate on merits and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information and the grounds of appeal of the revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this day 05th of May, 2026. MANISH BORAD PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) पुणे/ Pune; ददनांक/ Dated : 05th May, 2026. Abhishek आदेशकीप्र्ल्पअगे्े र/ Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्/ The Appellant. 1. प्यर्/ The Respondent.

The Pr. CIT concerned. िभागीयप्र्न्ि, आयकरअपीलीयअ्िकरण, “B” बें, 4. पुणे/ DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune. गार्फ़ाइल/ Guard File. 5. //True Cope//