ARK CARTONS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 8(1) PUNE, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 720/PUN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 June 2025AY 2017-18Bench: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's non-compliance before the CIT(A) but also found reasonable cause for the same due to a director's illness. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside for de novo adjudication to ensure justice.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order confirming additions made on account of unexplained cash deposits and a disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had failed to respond to notices issued by the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming additions and disallowances without proper verification due to the assessee's non-compliance, and if a de novo adjudication is warranted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 69A,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE

Before: DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Rinkesh Gupta – CA
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.CIT(DR)
Hearing: 24/06/2025Pronounced: 26/06/2025

Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ark Cartons Private Limited, V The Income Tax Officer, 67/9, D-3 Block, MIDC, s Ward-8(1), Pune-44. Chinchwad, Pune – 411019. Maharashtra. PAN: AANCA6083B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Rinkesh Gupta – CA Revenue by Shri Rajesh Haladkar – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 24/06/2025 Date of pronouncement 26/06/2025 आदेश/ ORDER

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:

1.

This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC] passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 17.01.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for A.Y.2017-18 dated 23.12.2019. The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :

1. On the facts and Circumstances of the case, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in adding and Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the various additionissionccount of cash deposits in deposits in the bank account of Rs. 18,50,000/- as unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without properly appreciating the facts of the case. The Appellant prays that the entire addition may please be deleted.

2. On the facts and Circumstances of the case, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in adding and Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 54318/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. 1961 without properly appreciating the facts of the case. The Appellant prays that the disallowance may please be deleted.

3. On the facts and Circumstances of the Case, the Ld. Assessing officer erred in applying provisions of Section 115BBE to the addition made u/s 69A ignoring the fact that the provisions of Section of 115BBE are not applicable for the Assessment year 2017-18. Therefore It be held that the Provisions of Section 115BBE are not applicable for AY 2017- 18 and relief may be given to the appellant.

4.

The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute or withdraw all or any of the Grounds of Appeal

herein and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or before the appeal hearing so as to enable the Hon'ble Tribunal members to decide these according to the law The Grounds stated above are independent of, and without prejudice to one another.” Submission of ld.AR :

2. Before us, at the time of hearing, ld.AR for the assessee submitted that Assessee Company could not made compliance due to the reason the one of the Directors of the Company was unwell. The ld.AR for the assessee submits that non-compliance is neither intentional nor deliberate.

2.1 Hence, ld.AR pleaded for one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee for filing necessary documents before the ld.CIT(A) may be granted.

2.2 Ld.AR invited our attention to the paper book which contains copy of Bank Account Statements and copy of Financial Statements. Ld.AR submitted that Assessee was having cash in hand which was deposited in the Bank Account. Ld.AR argued that no addition can be made under section 69A of the Act.

Submission of ld.DR : 3. Ld.DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A).

Findings & Analysis : 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, ld.CIT(A) had issued notices under section 250 of the Act, vide dates 09.01.2021, 31.01.2024, 02.07.2024, 19.07.2024, 07.08.2024 and 03.12.2024 requiring assessee to file written submission along with supporting documents. However, Assessee has not responded to any of the notices before the ld.CIT(A).

4.1 Considering the non-compliance from Assessee, ld.CIT(A) had no option except to decide the appeal based on the relevant material available on record. Accordingly, he decided the appeal and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

5.

Considering the submissions and pleadings made by the assessee, we find that there is reasonable and sufficient cause for non-compliance before the ld.CIT(A). It is noticed that as per the cash book, opening cash balance was Rs.4,17,906/- on 01.04.2016. We requested ld.AR to explain where the cash was kept. Ld.AR submitted that the said opening cash was kept in the office of the assessee which is in the factory premises of the Assessee at MIDC Chinchwad. It is also observed that Assessee has withdrawn cash on 02.04.2016 and 04.04.2016 so and so forth. We asked ld.AR when more than four lakhs cash was available on 01.04.2016, why small sums of Rs.10,000/- etc., was withdrawn from the bank! The ld.AR just said that assessee wanted to withdraw it.

6.

Be it as it may be, all these facts have not been verified by the ld.CIT(A), as there was non-compliance before the ld.CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set-aside the order of ld.CIT(A) to ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Assessee shall file all details before the ld.CIT(A). The ld.CIT(A) shall provide opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.

7.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26th June, 2025.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →