NILESH SURESH BAGMAR,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 5(1), PUNE, PUNE

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH: SMC BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.1607/PUN/2026 (Assessment Year : 2016-17) Nilesh Suresh Bagmar, ITO Ward 5(1). S.No.669/1B, Hastipuram PMT Building, Society, vs. Swargate, Flat.No.39,NR, Pune-411037, Bibvewadi, Maharashtra. Pune-411037, Maharashtra. PAN:AMDPB9790P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Assessee : Shri.None For Revenue : Shri. Manish Mehta.JCIT. Sr.DR

Date of Hearing : 30.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 30.06.2026

ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER The Assessee has filed an appeal against the ex-parte order of CIT(A)/ NFAC passed u/sec 147 r.w.s144B and u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has raised ground of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the Assessing Officer (A.O) has received information from insight portal that the assessee has made cash deposits in the bank account and the return of income was not filed for A.Y.2016-17. The A.O has reason to believe that the income has escaped assessment and issued notice u/sec 148 of the Income Tax Act

ITA.No.1607/PUN/2026 Nilesh Suresh Bagmar.

and the assessee has filed the return of income on 23.12.2023 disclosing a total income of Rs.2,40,000/-.Subsequently, issued notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act to substantiate the sources of cash deposits and there was partial compliance. Whereas the A.O was not satisfied with the explanations and based on the information available on record made addition of unexplained explained cash deposits u/sec69A of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.33,16,500/- and passed the order u/sec147 r.w.s144B of the Act dated 29.02.2024. 3. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A).Whereas the CIT (A) has considered grounds of appeal, statement of facts, finding of the A.O and has issued notice of hearing and since there was no compliance, CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the action of the AO and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed appeal with Hon’ble Tribunal. None appeared on behalf of the assessee. 4. Heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie 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 dismiss the appeal ex-parte confirming the action of the Assessing Officer. Whereas the CIT(A) has issued notices referred at Para 4 of the order but there was no response except one adjournment Whereas the assesse has raised grounds of appeal challenging the addition made by the A.O and there could be various reasons for non appearance/ non compliance which cannot be overruled. Therefore,

ITA.No.1607/PUN/2026 Nilesh Suresh Bagmar.

considering the facts, circumstances, submissions and principles of natural justice, we shall provide with one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate the case with evidences and information. Accordingly, set aside the order of the CIT(A) and remit the disputed issue to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh and the assessee should be provided adequate opportunity of hearing and shall cooperate in submitting the information for early disposal of appeal. And the grounds of appeal of the assesse are allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.06.2026.

Sd/- (PAVANKUMARGADALE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated: 30th June 2026

Copy of the Order forwarded to:- 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Ld. PCIT concerned. 4. D.R. ITAT, SMC Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File.

By Order //True Copy// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune.