CARCANET INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, WAR-1(2), PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2061/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 June 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed the order without adjudicating upon all submissions and providing adequate opportunity. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

During a survey, undisclosed cash receipts were identified. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided based on available material without considering all submissions and documents. The assessee requested an opportunity to present further evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice by passing an order without considering all submissions and evidence. Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 133A,Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Thakkar
For Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR
Hearing: 25.03.2026Pronounced: 01.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2061/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Carcanet Infra Projects Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-1(2), Pune Office No.460, Marvel Vista, Lulla Nagar Chowk, Sahaney Sujan Park, Bibwewadi, Pune 411037, Maharashtra PAN : AAECC5337M Appellant Respondent

Assessee by : Shri Rajeev Thakkar Revenue by : Shri Amol Khairnar, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 25.03.2026 Date of pronouncement : 01.06.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to the Assessment Year 2017-18 is directed against the order dated 23.06.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of the Assessment Order dated 26.12.2019 passed u/s.143(3) of the Act.

2.

Assessee has raised six grounds of appeal but the ld. Counsel for the assessee has made submissions only in respect of Ground No.1 which reads as under :

2 ITA No.2061/PUN/2025 Carcanet Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.

“1. On facts and circumstances prevailing in the case and as per provisions and scheme of the Act, it be held that the first Appellate Authority has passed order u/s 250 of the Act without adjudicating upon the written submissions and contentions duly placed on record by the Appellant. The Appellant was not afforded proper and adequate opportunity of being heard, and the impugned order has thus been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The order so framed be set aside. The Appellant be granted just and proper relief in this respect.”

3.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to Ground No.1 submitted that even though assessee made submissions and sought some time for furnishing of certain documents still ld.CIT(A) has proceeded to pass the impugned order on the basis of material available. He submitted that now the details as called for by ld.CIT(A) have been collected by the assessee and if an opportunity is granted the same can be placed before ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication on merits of the case. He accordingly prayed for remitting the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication in the interest of justice and fair play. 4. Ld. Departmental Representative though supported the order of ld.CIT(A) but fairly did not strongly oppose the request made by ld. Counsel for the assessee. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a Private Limited company engaged in the business of Construction and Development of Plots. A survey action u/s.133A of the Act conducted on 05.12.2016 at the business premises of the assessee. Thereafter, during the course of survey, certain documents were found where it was alleged that cash receipts of Rs.9,85,97,114/- for A.Y. 2014-15 to A.Y. 2017-18 are undisclosed which included a sum of Rs.5,44,69,982/- pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18. Regular return of income for A.Y.

3 ITA No.2061/PUN/2025 Carcanet Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.

2017-18 filed on 07.11.2017 declaring total income of Rs.4,48,950/-. Case selected for Scrutiny and assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Act were concluded and ld. Assessing Officer made additions for undisclosed income at Rs.5,44,69,982/- as discussed in para 7.2 of the assessment order and assessed the income at Rs.13,16,59,132/-. 6. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) raising multiple grounds and also made written submissions. However, the final date of hearing fixed on 20.06.2025 but on 21.06.2025 assessee made an application seeking time to submit the data required as called for by ld.CIT(A). However, ld.CIT(A) waited till 23.06.2025 and proceeded to pass the order on the basis of available material. These facts indicate that assessee could only make partial submissions and various details which were required to be filed by the assessee in support of the grounds of appeal raised before ld.CIT(A) could not be filed and in absence of these details ld.CIT(A) proceeded to pass the impugned order and confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 7. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee made a prayer for affording one more opportunity since the details called for by ld.CIT(A) as well as other details in support of grounds of appeal are now available with the assessee and can be placed before ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication. We therefore considering Ground No.1 raised by the assessee and there being no strong objection from the side of ld. Departmental Representative, deem it appropriate to restore all the issues raised in Grounds of appeal No.2 to 5 to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication. Without dwelling into merits of the case, the issues raised in the instant appeal are remitted to the file of ld.CIT(A). Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford

4 ITA No.2061/PUN/2025 Carcanet Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd.

reasonable opportunity to the assessee and consider the documents/evidences to be filed by the assessee. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail on the ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 01st day of June, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (VINAY BHAMORE) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ंक / Dated : 01st June, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.06.02 10:36:25 +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, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

// True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune

More judgments on Section 133A

All 5,893 judgments and leading authorities on Section 133A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →