LATE BHAUSO GUNDA PATIL LEGAL HEIR SHRI SHASHIKANT PATIL,TASGAON vs. ITO, WARD 4, SANGLI, SANGLI
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”एस एम सी” Ɋायपीठ पुणेमŐ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE
BEFORE DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.647/PUN/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2012-13
Late Bhauso Gunda Patil Legal
Heir Shri Shashikant Patil,
At Post Khatav Brahmanal,
Tal-Tasgaon,
Maharashtra-
416423. V s
The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-4, Sangli.
PAN: APIPP7148F
Appellant/ Assessee
Respondent / Revenue
Assessee by None
Revenue by Shri Eknath Abhang –Addl.CIT(DR)
Date of hearing
24/07/2025
Date of pronouncement 30/07/2025
आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This is an appeal filed by Shri Shashikant Patil as Legal Heir of Late Bhauso Gunda Patil against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2012-13 dated 26.10.2023, emanating from order u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated
28.11.2019. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :
ITA No.647/PUN/2025 [A]
2
“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the lower authorities have erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without giving proper opportunity of hearing and the Act being in violation of principle of natural justice, it is prayed that appeal may kindly be restored back to lower authorities
(A.O.) for readjudication/reconsideration.
Learned CIT [Appeals] has erred in fact in confirming the addition made by AO u/s 69A of Rs. 29,12,437 as unexplained money despite the fact that the appellant has withdrawn the amount of agricultural income from his Sangli DCC bank account and redeposited the same in his other bank account and made the investment and appellant has all the evidences are fully verifiable.
Appellant craves leave to add additional ground of appeal or amend /alter any of the above ground of appeal.”
At the outset of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the Assessee. No adjournment letter was filed.
Findings & Analysis :
We have heard ld.DR for the Revenue and perused the records. In this case, an order u/s.144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2012-13 was passed on 28.11.2019 in the case of Bhauso Gunda Patil. The Assessing Officer has initiated proceedings based on the information regarding cash deposits of Rs.16,90,000/- with Bharti Sahakari Bank Limited. Assessing Officer(AO) passed the assessment order, assessing the income at Rs.30,58,330/-. Aggrieved by the assessment order, Assessee filed appeal before
ITA No.647/PUN/2025 [A]
3
ld.CIT(A) who confirmed the addition as Assessee could not file any details.
On perusal of the Affidavit of Mr.ShashikantBhauso Patil, it is noted that Assessee Bhauso Gunda Patil expired on “02.07.2020”. Mr.ShashikantBhauso Patil is son of “Late Bhauso Gunda Patil”. In the Affidavit, he submitted that due to illness of his father, the Chartered Accountant could not file replies to the notices issued by ld.CIT(A).
1 It is noted that ld.CIT(A) has passed order u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the name of Bhauso Gunda Patil on 26.10.2023. However, Late Bhauso Gunda Patil expired on 02.07.2020. Therefore, it was mandatory for ld.CIT(A) to bring the Legal Heir on record. It is also noted that ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee which is mandatory for ld.CIT(A).
2 It is also noted that assessment order is u/s.144 of the Act. It has been submitted by the Legal Heir of the Assessee that due to illness of the Assessee, Late Bhauso Gunda Patil, they could not file proper submission during assessment proceedings.
ITA No.647/PUN/2025 [A]
4
4.3 In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set-aside the order of ld.CIT(A) to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. We direct the ld.CIT(A) to bring Legal Heir on record. The ld.CIT(A) shall provide the opportunity to the Assessee. The Assessee shall file necessary details before the ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Delay :
The Legal Hier of the Assessee filed an Affidavit for condonation of Delay. We have perused the Affidavit. Substantial justice is more important than procedural delay. Therefore, we are convinced that there was sufficient and reasonable cause for delay.
Hence, the Delay is condoned.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 30 July, 2025. VINAY BHAMORE
Dr.DIPAK P. RIPOTE
JUDICIAL MEMBER
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 30 July, 2025/ SGR
ITA No.647/PUN/2025 [A]
5
आदेशकᳱᮧितिलिपअᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant.
2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent.
3. The CIT(A), concerned.
4. The Pr. CIT, concerned.
5. िवभागीयᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “एस एम सी” बᱶच,
पुणे / DR, ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune.
6. गाडᭅफ़ाइल / Guard File.
आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER,
////
Senior Private Secretary
आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे/ITAT, Pune.