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

ITSSA 35/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 August 2026AY 2017-185 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged that the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order due to the assessee's lack of proper compliance and failure to respond to notices, despite adequate opportunities. However, the Tribunal also noted that there could be various reasons for non-compliance, which should not be overruled. Considering the facts, circumstances, submissions, and the principles of natural justice, the Tribunal decided to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to substantiate their case with evidence and information. Accordingly, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the disputed issue was remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. The assessee is to be provided with adequate opportunity of hearing and is expected to cooperate in submitting information for early disposal. The grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwad, engaged in providing coaching classes, is the appellant, and the DCIT is the respondent. The assessment years under appeal are 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17, and 2017-18. The appeals challenge the ex parte order of the CIT(A) Pune-12, dated 24.02.2026, which confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 153A(1)(b) and Section 250 of the Income Tax Act. A search under Section 132 was conducted on 18.09.2019, leading to a notice under Section 153A on 28.11.2020. The AO, based on seized fee receipt books, found a difference of Rs. 24,25,370/- between total fees collected (Rs. 56,69,400/-) and disclosed income (Rs. 32,44,030/-) for FY 2013-14. The AO made an addition of this differential amount as suppressed receipts. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of suppressed receipts made by the AO, in violation of principles of natural justice, by passing an ex parte order without properly considering the assessee's case on merits? The assessee's contention is that the non-compliance with notices before the CIT(A) was due to circumstances beyond their control, not a wilful act. They argue that they have a strong case on merits and should be granted an opportunity to substantiate their claims with material evidence before the lower authorities. The assessee seeks a chance to present their case properly. The revenue's contention, as supported by the Ld. DR, is that the CIT(A) rightly passed an ex parte order due to the assessee's lack of proper compliance and failure to respond adequately to notices, despite opportunities provided. The revenue supports the CIT(A)'s order confirming the AO's action.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 132,Section 153A,Section 153A(1)(b),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE

Before: SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

Hearing: 30.07.2026Pronounced: 12.08.2026

PER BENCH:- These four appeals are filed by the assessee against the common order of the CIT(A) Pune-12 dated 24.02.2026 passed u/sec 153A(1)(b) and u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the ex parte order of the CIT(A) in sustaining the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

2.

Since the issues involved in these appeals are common, identical and similar and for the sake of convenience, we shall take up IT(SS)A 36/PUN/2026 for the Assessment Year 2014- 15 as a lead case and facts narrated.

IT (SS) A No. 36, 37, 34 & 35/PUN/2026 KalindaRam

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 →