AMIT SINGH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PUNE

There is a delay of 77 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents of the condonation application filed along with the affidavit and after hearing the Ld. DR, the delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication.

Although a number of grounds have been raised by the assessee, however, these all relate to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC in confirming the addition of Rs.55,79,500/- made by the Assessing Officer as unexplained money u/s 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has filed his return of income for assessment year 2017-18 on 21.10.2021 declaring total income at Rs.46,21,330/-. The assessee in the instant case had made declaration on 29.09.2016 under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 as under:

However, the assessee did not fully adhere with the provisions of IDS, 2016. Therefore, the Pr.CIT-4, Pune vide letter dated 22.03.2021 intimated that the assessee has defaulted in his declaration made under IDS, 2016 as much as he has failed to pay the due taxes within the prescribed time limit as per IDS, 2016.

In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on account of delay in filing of the same by 155 days.

Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the time of hearing filed a copy of Form No.4 issued by Pr.CIT dated 16.01.2026 and submitted that the assessee has duly declared the undisclosed income under IDS, 2016 and paid the entire taxes, surcharge and penalty within the stipulated time prescribed under the scheme. However, Form No.4 was not issued by the department despite full compliance by the assessee. He submitted that non-issue of Form No.4 is purely an administrative lapse on the part of the department and the assessee cannot be penalized for failure of the department to perform a ministerial act. He submitted that after an application was filed with CPGRAM for issue of Form No.4 under IDS, 2016, the Pr. CIT has uploaded the Form No.4 in the portal on 16.01.2026 which he had issued on 02.04.2024. He also filed a copy of the same.

The Ld. DR on the other hand submitted that Form No.4 has now been issued by the competent authority.

After hearing both the sides, we find the case of the assessee was reopened on the basis of information from the Pr. CIT-4, Pune that the assessee has defaulted in his declaration made under the IDS, 2016 as much as he has failed to pay the due taxes within the prescribed time limit as per IDS, 2016. However, on the basis of application filed with the CPGRAM for issue of Form No.4 under IDS, 2016, the Pr. CIT-4, Pune has uploaded Form No.4 in portal on 16.01.2026 which was issued by him on 02.04.2024 which is as under:

Under these circumstances, once the assessee has made the declaration, paid due taxes along with surcharge and penalty and Form No.4 has been issued by the competent authority, nothing survives. We, therefore, in absence of any contrary material brought to our notice by the Ld. DR, accept the contention of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee and quash the proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer u/s 148 of the Act. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.