PANDHARI ASHRUJI GAIKWAD,AURANGABAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

ITSSA 49/PUN/2026Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 October 2026AY 2019-203 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee, Pandhari Ashruji Gaikwad, has filed appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Pune Bench against the orders of the CIT(A), Pune-12, which arose from assessment orders passed under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. These assessments were based on information and loose papers seized during a search under Section 132 of the Act in the case of Gaikwad Coaching Classes on September 18, 2019. The assessment years under appeal are 2014-15 to 2019-20. The assessee had partially submitted documents to the CIT(A) despite sufficient opportunities. The ITAT noted that connected matters, specifically Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwas Vs. DCIT, were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the submissions and the record, observed that the assessments were framed under Section 153C based on information found during a search. The assessee had partially complied with the notices issued by the CIT(A). The Tribunal, in the larger interest of justice and to be fair to both parties, decided to remit all the issues raised in the batch of appeals for assessment years 2014-15 to 2019-20 back to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The assessee was also directed to remain vigilant and not seek adjournments unless for a reasonable cause. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the grounds of appeal were allowed for statistical purposes. The operative direction was to remand the matter to the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the learned CIT(A) on merits, considering bonafide reasons for non-submission of complete details. The assessee argued that due to bonafide reasons, they could not submit all the required documents on merits to the learned CIT(A) and therefore prayed for one more opportunity to appear before the CIT(A). They relied on the decision in the connected case of Kalinda Ramdas Gaikwas Vs. DCIT, where similar appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The revenue, through the learned CIT-DR, supported the order of the learned CIT(A) but did not strongly object to the assessee's prayer, acknowledging partial compliance from the assessee's side.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 153C,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa Khare
For Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde, CIT-DR
Hearing: 07.10.2026Pronounced: 08.10.2026

PER BENCH : The captioned appeals at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Yrs. 2014-15 to 2019-20 are directed against the combined order of ld.CIT(A), Pune-12 arising out respective Assessment Orders passed u/s.153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that for bonafide reasons assessee could not submit anything on merits of the case in response to the notices issued by ld.CIT(A) except filing copy of Income Tax Returns, Computation and Balance sheet. She only prayed for affording one more opportunity to go before ld.CIT(A). She also referr

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 153C

All 9,497 judgments and leading authorities on Section 153C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →