SAMEER CHANDRAKANT DUGANE,PUNE, MAHARASHTRA. vs. WARD (6), PUNE, PUNE

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and a director of Unity Green Solutions Private Limited. The Return of Income for AY 2022-23 was furnished on 30/12/2022 declaring total income of Rs.4,97,820/-. The said income consists of Income from salary of Rs.6,00,000/-, Income from other sources of Rs.5,375/-, and Income from house property of Rs.1,20,000/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and statutory notices u/s 142(1) and show cause notices were also issued to the assessee. After considering the submissions of the assessee, order u/s 143(3) was passed by Assessing Officer on 12/03/2024 determining total income of Rs.99,88,326/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.4,97,820/-. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.94,89,091/- u/s 69A and addition of Rs.1,415/- for undisclosed interest income. 3 4. Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, an appeal was preferred before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Not being satisfied with the reply of the assessee with regard to addition of Rs.94,89,091/-, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the addition of Rs.94,89,091/- made by the Assessing Officer. However, with regard to addition of Rs.1,415/-, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC partly allowed the ground and directed the Assessing Officer to verify the claim of the assessee. 5. It is this order (with regard to confirmation of addition of Rs.94,89,091/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A of the IT Act) against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. 6. Ld. AR appearing from side of the assessee submitted before us that the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is unjustified. Ld. AR further submitted before us that the addition of Rs.94,89,091/- consists of cash deposit of Rs.41,86,000/- in the bank account and online transfer of Rs.53,03,091/- in the bank account. In this regard, Ld. AR submitted that the mother of the assessee & senior member of the family, Smt. Sugandha Chandrakant Dugane was suffering from brain stoke and undergoing medical treatment. To meet any unforeseen eventuality and emergency requirement of funds, the family have obtained the loans and distributed it amongst the 4 members who had withdrawn the cash and kept in hand for the said purpose. Subsequently, the cash was deposited back into the bank account of the assessee. Regarding amount of Rs.53,03,091/- transferred in the bank account of the assessee, the assessee has furnished complete details and sources from where and by whom the amount was transferred and regarding cash deposit of Rs.41,86,000/-, Ld. AR also furnished the details of persons and from where they have withdrawn and deposited in the bank account of the assessee, therefore, the same was required to be accepted, however Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC erred in not accepting the same. Ld. AR further submitted that during the pendency of this appeal the ailing mother of the assessee i.e. Smt. Sugandha Chandrakatn Dugane expired on 02.05.2025 for whom all this exercise was done by his family. Ld. AR requested to provide one opportunity to appear and explain all the relevant facts and details before the Assessing Officer in support of its contentions. 7. Ld. DR appearing from the side of the Revenue relied on the orders passed by the subordinate authorities and requested to confirm the same. 5 8. 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 due to critical health condition of mother of the assessee, the requisite details and documents could not be furnished before the Assessing Officer as well as before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Before us, Ld. AR produced various charts and details in support of its contentions. After perusing the same, we find some force in the arguments of Ld. counsel of the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with regard to addition of Rs.94,89,091/- made u/s 69A of the IT Act and remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to decide the issue of addition of Rs.94,89,091/- afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer in this regard and to produce the relevant details, documents and evidences in support of its contentions without taking any adjournment under any pretext, otherwise the Assessing Officer 6 shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 18th day of December, 2025. (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER

गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,