VIJAY RAMBHAU PANDAV,NAGPUR vs. PNE-W-93-27, NANDED

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1501/PUN/2026 िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2020-21 Vijay Rambhau Pandav, Vs. ITO, Ward-1, Nanded. Flat No.103, Gajanan Prerna Apartment, Near Swami Colony, Old Katol Road, Nagpur- 440007. PAN : AUDPP7750P Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Rajpal Singhai Revenue by : Shri Sandeep Jumale (Virtual) Date of hearing : 05.08.2026 Date of pronouncement : 22.10.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 10.02.2026 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) NFAC erred in dismission the appeal without considering the submission made

2 ITA No.1501/PUN/2026 by the assessee on 24.08.2025 is unjustified, bad in law looking to facts of the case. 2. On the facts and circumstances, the Learned Assessing Officer erred in re-opening of Assessment Looking to facts and circumstances, without verifying the information available in his hand. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT (Appeal) erred in confirming the addition done by Assessing Officer of Rs. 250,000 is unjustified, bad in law looking to facts of the case, and liable to be deleted by your honour. 4. The Assessee craves leave to add, alter, amend, delete, or modify any of the above grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual salaried employee in Government of Maharashtra and has furnished its return of income on 01.09.2020 by declaring income of Rs.7,84,920/-. On the basis of information forwarded by the DDTI (Inv.), Aurangabad that a search u/s 132 of the IT Act which was conducted in the case of Manji Pride Group, Gadia Group and their associated entities wherein incriminating material related to the assessee have been found which suggest that the assessee has paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- in cash on-money to the searched party i.e. Gadiya Group for the purchase of plot. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act and notice u/s 148 of the IT Act was issued to the assessee. Subsequently, notices u/s

3 ITA No.1501/PUN/2026 142(1) and show cause notice respectively were issued to the assessee, however, the assessee did not complied to any of the above notices, therefore, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 19.03.2025 completed the assessment proceedings u/s 147 r.ws. 144 of the IT Act by determining the income of the assessee at Rs.10,34,920/- as against the income of Rs.7,84,928/- returned by the assessee. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.2,50,000/- being payment of on-money in cash for purchase of plot. 4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the appeal was furnished belatedly i.e. with the delay of 12 days, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay and without going into merits of the case. 5. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. We have heard Ld. counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record including the paper book furnished by the assessee. In this regard, we find that the assessee is a salaried

4 ITA No.1501/PUN/2026 employee of State Government of Maharashtra and deputed on some special secret duty which involves frequent movement throughout the State of Maharashtra and due to this reason could not appear on the dates of hearing fixed by the Assessing Officer. Apart from above, we also find that the assessee is not denying that he has paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- in cash to the builder from whom he has purchased the plot & the circumstances & the sources were also described by the assessee. In this regard, a written submission is furnished before the bench which reads as under :- “Detail submission regarding the transaction of Rs. 250000/- 14. That the assessee had purchased plot for consideration of Rs. 15,62,000/- and on purchase consideration there is no dispute between the assessee and department. 15. That in the year 2019-20, Gadiya Group commenced sale of plots under the project "Sai Sacchai City" at Gut No. 78, Village Golewadi, Aurangabad. In 2020, the assessee has decided to purchase a plot in said project. On 03.01.2020 in morning hours, the assessee visited the office of Gadiya Group along with cash of Rs. 250000/- and the assessee had agreed to purchase Plot No. 15, Gut No. 78, Village Golewadi, Aurangabad, in the said project for a total consideration of ₹15,62,000/-. The assessee has paid Rs. 250000/- to staff of Gadiya Group namely Mrs. Aarti Arisudan Bankar-Patil. The said fellow issued a receipt to assessee upon the receipt of Rs. 250000/-. On the same day in afternoon, on 03.01.2020, the assessee received call Mr. Vedant Shirish Gadiya, Director of Gadiya Group, he return the cash and asked to pay 20% of the total consideration, i.e. ₹3,12,000/-, as booking amount otherwise your booking is kept on hold and after 2 days booking stand cancelled automatic and the said official of Gadiya Group take acknowledgment on the same receipt of returning the cash amount Rs. 2,50,000/- from the

5 ITA No.1501/PUN/2026 assessee. The assessee acknowledges as "Received" and put signature acknowledging the refund of Rs. 250000/-. The said receipt is re-produce on page No. 9 of assessment order. 16. Thereafter the assessee paid Rs. 300000/- through cheque on 03.01.2020 and Rs. 12000/- on 21.01.2020 through NEFT. The assessee is herewith enclosing the copy of bank statement for kind of your ready reference and perusal. 17. That assessee herewith brings to your kind notice that the assessee has withdraw cash from joint bank account of assessee with his father, Axis Bank Account No. 909010039812756 amounting Rs. 40000/- on 01.01.2020 and Rs. 170000/ on 03.01.2020 to arrange and make payment for booking of plot. Balance amount is arranged from past saving. 18. That the assessee filed a reply before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) NFAC on 24.08.2025 stating the facts of transaction along with purchase deed and other relevant documents and the same were not considered. 19. As mention here in above the assessee is state government employee, he informs to his department regarding the purchase of plot and manner of payment along with relevant documents. At that time, he posted at Sironcha Dist. Gadchiroli. Copy of same application is attached herewith for kind of your ready reference and perusal. 20. In last it is submitted that receipt is found as loose paper during the course of search in premises of Gadiya Group and not from the the assessee. The assessee stating the facts of transaction to meet the end of justice from your honour.” 7. From a perusal of above submission, we find that initially the assessee paid an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to the employee of the Gadiya Group who was not aware with any of the procedure, however, when the Director of the group returned the above amount and suggested to make payment through check to secure the booking of the plot the assessee on the same day made payment

6 ITA No.1501/PUN/2026 through check. We further find that the assessee has explained the sources of Rs.2,50,000/- cash. In this regard, it is the explanation of the assessee that an amount of Rs.40,000/- was withdrawn on 01.01.2020 and an amount of Rs.1,70,000/- was withdrawn on 03.01.2020 from Axis Bank Account No.909010039812756 and Rs.40,000/- cash was already available with him amounting in all to Rs.2,50,000/- which was paid cash for the purchase of the plot. Accordingly, it was the contention before the bench that no on-money was paid as alleged by the Assessing Officer and only total amount of Rs.15,62,000/- was paid as consideration as per the registered agreement. 8. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in view of submission/ explanation furnished by the assessee, we are of the considered opinion that no on-money was paid by the assessee and the amount of Rs.2,50,000/- which was paid initially by the assessee was from the explained sources of income. Accordingly, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of

7 ITA No.1501/PUN/2026 Rs.2,50,000/-. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on this 22nd day of October, 2026. Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; �दनांक / Dated : 22nd October, 2026. Sujeet/DOC आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant. 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “SMC” ब�च, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. गाड� फ़ाइल / Guard File. 5. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, Digitally signed by Sunil Kumar // True Copy // Sunil Kumar More More Assistant Registrar Date: 2026.10.24 17:00:23 +05'30' आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.