DHONDIRAM PUNDALIK DHULE,RAIGAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANVEL MAHARASHTRA

The ld.AR for the assessee appeared for the hearing Virtually. The ld.AR filed a paper book containing 39 pages. Ld.AR submitted that Assessee Retired from Indian Army. Assessee is a Senior Citizen. Assessee’s source of income is Pension and Interest Income.

1 The ld.AR invited our attention to the Assessment Order, wherein the Assessing Officer has alleged that cash of Rs.40,40,000/- in Savings Bank Account No.2020000 was deposited. Ld.AR submitted that Assessee do not have any such bank account having account no.2020000. Ld.AR invited our attention to Affidavit of the Assessee, wherein Assessee has submitted Bank Account Numbers of the Assessee. Ld.AR submitted that on perusal of the Affidavit, one can understand that Assessee do not have any Bank Account having number 2020000. Ld.AR submitted that in the Affidavit that Assessee has categorically denied any cash deposit of Rs.40,40,000/-. Ld.AR therefore, submitted that the addition of Rs.40,40,000/- made u/s.69A of the Act, in the Assessment Order is without any basis and needs to be deleted.

2 Ld.AR also submitted that the Assessing Officer has reopened assessment based on the reasons which are not supported by any authentic information. Therefore, the reopening is bad in law.

Ld.DR for the Revenue merely relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A).

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, the Assessee’s appeal in ITA No.895/PUN/2024 for A.Y.2013-14 was heard ex-parte by ITAT Pune on 12.08.2024. The ITAT Pune passed order in ITA No.895/PUN/2024 on 12.08.2024. The Assessee filed a Miscellaneous Application No.25/PUN/2025. The said Miscellaneous Application was heard on 20.06.2025. The ITAT Pune passed an order on 23.06.2025 in MA No.25/PUN/2025 arising out of ITA No.895/PUN/2024. The ITAT re-called the order in ITA No.895/PUN/2024 passed on 12.08.2024. Thus, the recalled matter was heard on 24.07.2025. ITA No.895/PUN/2024 [A]

2 The Notice u/s.148 dated 19.03.2020 was issued for A.Y.2013- 14. The Assessee filed Return of Income for A.Y.2013-14 in response to notice u/s.148 declaring total income of Rs.1,35,040/- which consist of Income from Salary and Income from Other Sources.

During the re-assessment proceedings, Assessee submitted details as called-for including Bank Account Statements. However, the Assessing Officer held that Assessee has not furnished any details regarding transaction of Rs.40,40,000/- made on 31.07.2012 mentioned in the notice. Accordingly, Assessing Officer made addition u/s.69A of Rs.40,40,000/-.

In the para 5.1 of the assessment order, Assessing Officer has referred the so-called transaction of Rs.40,40,000/-. The relevant part of Para 5.1 of the assessment order is scanned and reproduced here as under :

1 Thus, the Assessing Officer is referring some Saving Bank Account No.2020000, wherein according to Assessing Officer, Assessee has deposited Cash of Rs.40,40,000/- on 31.07.2012. However, Assessing Officer(AO) has not mentioned any name of the bank. During the re-assessment proceedings, Assessee has categorically denied any such transaction. Subsequently, Assessee has filed an Affidavit also stating that “No such transaction has been entered”. During the re-assessment proceedings, Assessee had filed Copy of Bank Statements for Account No.5782 maintained with Bank of India. Assessee has also filed details of Bank Account maintained by Assessee. In these facts and circumstances, in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has not referred even the “alleged Name of the Bank”. Therefore, once Assessee has denied that he does not has any Bank Account having account number

We have already mentioned that the Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs.40,40,000/- without any basis. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs.40,40,000/-.

In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has reproduced reasons recorded for reopening. The same are reproduced here as under : “1. “The Assessee has not filed return of income for A.Y.2013-14

In respect of the assessee following information is available in the annual information report

Ongoing through office records, it has been found that the assessee has NOT filed return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14, therefore, he had not disclosed the income pertaining to above mentioned transaction.

In view of the above, I have reason to believe that income of the assessee for A.Y 2013-14 has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of Section 147 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The amount of income remained to be brought to tax is exceeding Rs.1,00,000/- for A.Y. 2013-14, I have reason to believe that the income of assessee for the year under consideration has escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6 In this case, a return of income was not filed for the year under consideration. Accordingly, in this case, the only requirement to initiate proceeding u/s. 147 is reason to believe which has been recorded above,

Notices u/s. 142(1) were issued on 30.12.2020 and 07.01.2021 calling for details of cash deposits in the bank account.”

On perusal of the said reasons, one can understand that in the reasons Assessing Officer has not referred to any specific Bank Account, has vaguely mentioned cash deposits. Assessing Officer has not even bothered to mention the name of the Bank. This shows that the reasons recorded for reopening are without any application of mind and without any valid basis. Therefore, prima-facie there is ITA No.895/PUN/2024 [A]

1 For all the reasons discussed above, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 31 July, 2025. VINAY BHAMORE

गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,