SURANA BHANSALI DEVELOPERS,PUNE vs. ITO, CIRCLE-5, PUNE, PUNE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE
BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1438/PUN/2025
Assessment Year : 2017-18
Surana Bhansali Developers
263 A Patil Plaza,
Near Saras Baug,
Swargate, Pune-411009,
Maharashtra
PAN: ABAFS9747H
Vs.
Assistant
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Circle 5, Pune
Appellant
Respondent
आदेश / ORDER
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2017-18 is directed against the order dated
22.03.2025 of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment Order dated
24.12.2019 passed u/s.143(3) of the Act.
At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee requested to remit all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) as the assessee failed to furnish any details/ submissions/documentary evidence to substantiate the claims made in the grounds of appeal. Ld. Departmental Representative did not oppose to the request. Appellant by : Shri Rajiv Thakkar Respondent by : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date of hearing : 16.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 14.08.2025 Surana Bhansali Developers
2
3. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. Assessee is a Partnership firm engaged in the business of Promoter, Builders and Developers.
Income of Rs.6,11,66,910/- declared in the return for A.Y.
2017-18 furnished on 23.09.2017. Case selected for scrutiny under CASS followed by validly serving statutory notices.
Assessment proceedings were concluded and additions amounting to Rs.5,20,25,745/- were made and income assessed at Rs.11,31,92,660/-. We further observe that assessee filed before ld.CIT(A) and in Form No.35 the e-mail mentioned in column 17 was suranaworld@rediffmail.com. On Page
1, old e-mail was mentioned namely girishkindre4@gmail.com. Ld.CIT(A) sent notice of hearing on both these e-mails and also sent to the third e-mail which as per ld. Counsel for the assessee is not related to the assessee nor was mentioned in Form No.35. 4. Under these given facts and circumstances, in the larger interest of justice and being fair to both the parties, we deem it proper to afford one more opportunity to the assessee and remit all the issues raised before us to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-aside proceedings shall afford a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the respondent-assessee and pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act in light of judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT (C) vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR
614 (Bombay). Assessee is directed to update email id and contact detail on ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside
Surana Bhansali Developers
3
and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 14th day of August, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; दनांक / Dated : 14th August, 2025. Satish
आदेश क ितिलिप अ ेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ / The Appellant. 2. यथ / The Respondent. 3. The Pr. CIT concerned. 4. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “B” बच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “B” Bench, Pune.
गाड फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
//// Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.