PRAVIN SUBHASH BOTRE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-10(1), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2467/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 May 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issues to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was granted one more opportunity to present their case with evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income, leading to reassessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer made additions for capital gains and unexplained investment. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without providing adequate opportunity, and whether the additions made by the AO were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 148A,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Respondent: Shri Madhukar Anand
Hearing: 06.05.2026Pronounced: 18.05.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2467/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pravin Subhash Botre, ITO, Ward (10)1, NR Datta Mandir Rupi Pratyakshakar bhavan, Nagar, Talwade, Dr. Ambedkar Marg, Pune-412114, Vs. Near Akurdi Raily way Maharashtra Station, PAN- AZQPB3345Q Pune- 411044, Maharashtra Appellant Respondent

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Madhukar Anand, JCIT (Virtual) Date of hearing : 06.05.2026 Date of pronouncement : 18.05.2026 ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of NFAC/CIT(A) passed u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act. The Assessee has raised the grounds of appeal against ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and sustaining addition of Capital Gains and unexplained investment u/sec69 of the Act made by the Assessing Officer.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that, the income tax department as per the ITBA system insight portal found that assessee has (i) purchased motor vehicle value of Rs. 6,50,429/- and (ii) sold immovable property of Rs. 1,01,50,000/- in the Financial Year 2014-15. The assessee has not filed return of income for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer

ITA No.2467/PUN/2025 Pravin Subhash Botre has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148A(b) of the Act and there was no compliance and the Assessing Officer passed order u/sec 148A(d) of the Acton 04.04.2022. Further notice u/sec. 148 of the Act was was issued. In compliance, the assessee has filed return of income disclosing a total income of Rs.2,13,930/- Further the assessee has filed the information in lieu of notice u/sec142(1) of the Act explaining the sources of purchase of motor vehicle and sale of immovable property. The Assessing Officer dealt on the facts and the information filed but was not satisfied with the explanations and made addition of capital gains of Rs.12,68,750/- and Rs.3,28,380/- u/sec69 of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.18,11,160/- and passed the order u/sec 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 06.03.2024.

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 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.

4.

At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee and the Ld. DR supported the order the CIT(A).

5.

We heard the Ld.DR 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.

ITA No.2467/PUN/2025 Pravin Subhash Botre 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. Whereas the assessee has raised grounds of appeal challenging in the addition of capital gains and unexplained investment u/sec69 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. And we allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this day of 18th May, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- DIPAK P. RIPOTE PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 18th May, 2026. Abhishek Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.05.19 13:33:01 +05'30'

ITA No.2467/PUN/2025 Pravin Subhash Botre आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, “SMC” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.

S. Details Date Initials Designation No 1 Draft dictated on 06/05/2026 Sr. PS/PS 2 Final Draft placed before author 07/05/2026 Sr. PS/PS 3 Draft proposed & placed before the Second /05/2026 JM/AM Member 4 Draft discussed/approved by Second /05/2026 JM/AM Member 5 Approved Draft comes to the Sr. PS/PS /05/2026 Sr. PS/PS 6 Kept for pronouncement on /05/2026 Sr. PS/PS 7 Date of uploading of Order /05/2026 Sr. PS/PS 8 File sent to Bench Clerk /05/2026 Sr. PS/PS 9 Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk 10 Date on which file goes to the A.R. 11 Date of Dispatch of order

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →