AMIT MADHUKARRAO POGULWAR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 87/NAG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur13 April 2026AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee deserves another opportunity to present their case. The issues were remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication, with directions to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing and consider the submitted documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income initially but later filed one declaring income. The Assessing Officer reopened the case based on information about an unsecured loan and made an addition of Rs. 18,22,000/- as unexplained money due to non-compliance. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a reasonable opportunity of hearing before the CIT(A) and if the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 69A,Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR ‘SMC’ BENCH, NAGPUR

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agrawal
For Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Hearing: 17.03.2026Pronounced: 13.04.2026

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2014-15 is directed against the order dated 10.11.2025 framed by Addl/JCIT(A)-1, Lucknow arising out of Assessment Order dated 14.11.2019 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

Brief facts of the case emerging from the record are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed return of income. Based on the information that assessee has given unsecured loan of Rs.18,25,000/- to M/s. Vijay Engineering Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. during the F.Y. 2013-14 but has not filed the return for A.Y. 2014-15, case of the assessee reopened. However, later on in response to notice, assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2014-15 filed on 15.06.2019 declaring income at Rs.2,14,100/-. Notices served upon the assessee to furnish details of books, bank statement, cash book, ledger of 2 Amit Madhukarrao Pogulwar

unsecured loans and also asked the assessee to explain the source of cash deposits in the bank accounts being maintained by the assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer also called the statements from the banks by issuing notice u/s.133(6) of the Act. On receipt of the same, ld. Assessing Officer asked the assessee to explain the total cash deposits aggregating to Rs.18,22,000/-, the details of which are mentioned on pages 3 and 4 of the assessment order. There was non-compliance from the side of assessee. Ld. Assessing Officer concluded the assessment making addition of Rs.18,22,000/- as unexplained money u/s.69A of the assessee. Income assessed at Rs.20,36,100/- as against the returned income of Rs.2,14,100/-. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) but with delay. Ld.CIT(A) has condoned the delay but dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution merely based on the statement of facts submitted along with Form No.35 and the assessment order.

3.

Before me, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to reasons beyond control of the assessee the case of the assessee could not be represented before ld.CIT(A) resulting into dismissal of the appeal of assessee. However, the assessee has possesses all the requisite details with documentary proof and given an opportunity he can substantiate the cash deposits so made.

4.

On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A).

3 Amit Madhukarrao Pogulwar

5.

I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. Considering that fact that assessee has been regularly filing the returns for the preceding years and also taking into consideration the contentions made by ld. Counsel for the assessee, I am of the considered view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity. In view thereof, the issues raised in the instant appeal are being remitted back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee. Assessee is directed to update email and contact details on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld.CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Findings of the CIT(A)/NFAC are set aside and Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 13th day of April, 2026. (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Nagpur/ दिन ांक / Dated : 13th April, 2026. Satish

4 Amit Madhukarrao Pogulwar Satish Kumar Madishetty Madishetty Date: 2026.04.15 16:08:16 +05'30'

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, न गपुर SMC बेंच, 4. न गपुर / DR, ITAT, “Nagpur SMC Bench, Nagpur ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

////

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →