SHITAL LAXMAN JADHAV,SATARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, SATARA

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “B” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.No.3093/PUN/2025 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Shital Laxman Jadhav, ITO, Ward-2, Plot No. 21, ManjunathManor Dayanprasad Colony, vs. Sadar Bazar, MIDC, Kodoli, Opp:Science Satara- 415004 college, Maharashtra. Satara-415001, PAN : AEJPJ2439R Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Suhas Kulkarani.AR For Revenue : Shri Ratnakar Shelake.Addl CIT.DR Date of Hearing : 15.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 20.04.2026 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER The appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC Delhi passed u/sec 250 of the Act. The assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition u/sec 69 and u/sec 69Aof the Act made by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Ld.AR of the assessee has not pressed ground of appeal.no.4 and made endorsement in the appeal memo. Accordingly this ground of appeal is withdrawn and is dismissed. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld. A.R. submitted that there is a delay of 76 days in filing appeal before Hon'ble Tribunal and delay was not intentional and filed affidavit by the assessee. On consideration of facts and information mentioned in the affidavit, there is reasonable cause explained and the Ld. DR. has no specific objections. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee has not filed the return of income for A.Y.2016-17 and Income Tax Department based on the Insight portal found that during the financial year 2015-16, the assessee has purchased immovable property for a consideration of ₹52,00,000/- and made cash deposits of ₹16,90,200/- in the savings account.. The AO has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148 of the Act. In compliance, the assessee has filed the return of income on 16- ₹1,54,900/-. 03-2023 disclosing a total income of Subsequently, the A.O has issued a show cause notice to explain the sources of purchase of the immovable property and the cash deposits and the assessee has filed the information. Whereas, the A.O. was not satisfied with the explanations and the partial information filed and made addition of ₹52,00,000/- as unexplained investment u/sec69 of the Act and similarly made addition of unexplained cash deposits u/sec 69A of the Act and assessed the total income at ₹ 70,45,100/- and passed the order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 19-02-2024. 4. 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 and finding of the AO and issued notice of hearings and since there was no compliance by the assessee to the notices, therefore, CIT(A) considering information on record has confirmed the action of the AO and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings and non compliance of notices before the CIT(A) is not intentional. Further, the Ld.. A.R. submitted that the assessee has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with material evidences and prayed for an opportunity to explain before the lower authorities. Per contra, the Ld. DR supported that the order the CIT(A). 6. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima Facie, the CIT(A) has passed the order, considering the facts that there is no compliance in spite of providing adequate opportunity of hearing and notices were issued. Therefore, CIT(A) was of the opinion that the assessee is not interested in prosecuting the appeal and dismissed the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the AO. Whereas the CIT(A) has issued notice of hearings referred in Para 4 of the CIT(A) order but there was no response and thus, the CIT(A) came to the conclusion that the assessee is not interested and decided the appeal based on the information available on record. The Ld. A.R. mentioned that the non-compliance to notices in the appellate proceedings was not intentional, but circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging in the additions u/sec69 and u/sec69A of the Act made by the AO and there could be various reasons for non-appearance which cannot be overruled. Therefore, we considering the facts, circumstances and principle of natural justice shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the disputed issues to the file the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for earlier disposal of appeal. We allow these grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 20.04.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (DIPAK P RIPOTE) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated: 20th April, 2026 Abhishek

Copy of the Order forwarded to:-