RAMDAS ASHRU GAIKWAD,AURANGABAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

ITSSA 38/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 September 2026AY 2014-157 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that while it is an admitted fact that the assessee did not produce sufficient documents before the CIT(A) despite opportunities, the assessee's submission regarding notices being sent to an incorrect email ID warrants consideration. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to restore the issue to the file of the CIT(A). The assessee is granted one final opportunity to substantiate their case by filing requisite details on an appointed date, without seeking adjournments. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue afresh based on facts and law. Due to the assessee's "recalcitrant attitude" in not submitting details promptly upon learning of the proceedings, a cost of Rs. 5,000/- is levied on the assessee, payable before the next hearing date before the CIT(A). The appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Ramdas Ashru Gaikwad, an individual running coaching classes, is the appellant, and the DCIT is the respondent. The appeals concern Assessment Years 2014-15 to 2019-20. A search action under section 132 was conducted on September 18, 2019. The assessee filed a return of income for AY 2014-15 declaring Rs. 95,99,010/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) questioned the source of investment in the Gaikwad Global School building, valued at Rs. 6,23,48,678/-. The assessee could explain Rs. 3,64,00,000/-, leading to an addition of Rs. 2,59,48,678/- under section 69 for the unexplained amount. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, upholding the AO's addition, citing the assessee's failure to provide details despite opportunities and the limited scope of setting aside under section 251(1)(a) for non-section 144 assessments.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee, particularly when the assessee claimed notices were sent to an incorrect email ID, thereby preventing timely submission of documents? (Question of fact and law, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that all notices from the CIT(A) were sent to a wrong email ID, making them unaware of the proceedings. They managed to file some documents like the Income Tax Return acknowledgement, audited financial statements, and profit and loss account, but could not submit all required details due to lack of time. They claimed they could substantiate their case if given an opportunity. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue relied on the CIT(A)'s order, stating that the assessee was granted sufficient opportunities but failed to produce relevant details, thus the CIT(A)'s order should be upheld.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 69,Section 144,Section 251(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE

Before: SHRI R. K. PANDA & Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT-DR
Hearing: 17.09.2026Pronounced: 18.09.2026

PER BENCH :

The above batch of six appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common order dated 25.02.2026 of the ld.CIT(A) Pune-12 relating to Assessment Years 2014-15 to 2019-20 respectively.

2.

Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.

2 IT(SS)A. Nos 38 to 43/PUN/2026 Ramdas Ashru Gaikwad

3.

First we take IT(SS)A No.38/PUN/2026 for A.Y. 2014-15 as the lead case. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is an individual and provided Tuition Classes under the name and style of Gaikwad Coaching Classes in Aurangabad. A se

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 132

All 14,598 judgments and leading authorities on Section 132 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →