ANIL DINKAR PATIL,BHUSAWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1) JALGAON, JALGAON
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.474/PUN/2025
िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year: 2017-18
Anil Dinkar Patil,
Anil Book Depot, Near New
Satara Bridge, Bhusawal,
Maharashtra – 425201. V s
The Income Tax Officer,
Ward-2(1), Jalgaon.
PAN: AQHPP5953C
Appellant/ Assessee
Respondent / Revenue
Assessee by Shri R.Shirude -AR & Shri Anil
Patil(Assessee)
Revenue by Shri Prashant B. Gandhale –JCIT(DR)
Date of hearing
08/04/2025
Date of pronouncement 09/04/2025
आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 12.12.2024 for Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
“1) In the facts, circumstances & position of law, learned CIT(A),
NFAC erred in confirming the order of Assessing Officer and passing ex-parte order.
ITA No.474/PUN/2025 [A]
2) In the facts, circumstances & position of law, learned CIT(A), NFAC erred in confirming the addition of Rs 9,00,000/- u/s 69A on account of cash deposits during demonetization period.
3) In the facts, circumstances & position of law, learned Assessing
Officer erred in estimating gross profit at Rs.9,04,752/- by treating cash deposit of Rs.1,13,09,410/- as sales @8% of cash deposit of Rs.1,13,09,410/-,
4) In the facts, circumstances & position of law, learned CIT(A), NIAC erred in treating the cash deposits during demonetization period as unexplained within the meaning of section 69A & at the same time cash deposits prior to & subsequent to demonetization period treated as business receipts & thereby erred in confirming charging of tax as per provisions of section 115BBE of L.T. Act, 1961. 5) Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or substitute to the above grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
Brief facts of the case :
In this case, Assessing Officer passed an order under section 144 of the Act, for A.Y.2017-18 as Assessee failed to submit the details. Assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition as no details were filed by assessee. Aggrieved by the same, Assessee has filed appeal before this Tribunal.
Submission of ld.AR :
The ld.AR submitted that assessee Mr.Anil Dinkar Patil is also present for the hearing. Mr.Anil Dinkar Patil submitted that he runs a book shop selling school books. Mr.Anil Dinkar Patil further
ITA No.474/PUN/2025 [A]
3
submitted that he does not understand anything about Income Tax.
He had entrusted the work to Chartered Accountant Ms.Seema
Prashant Agrawal, Prop. of Agrawal & Associates of Bhusawal.
However, the Tax Practitioner failed to comply the notices. The Tax
Practitioner provided some email id of her employee. Therefore, no notice was received by him directly. Mr.Anil Dinkar Patil submitted that during this period his mentally retarded son was critically ill.
Therefore, he could not follow up with Chartered Accountant.
Mr.Anil Dinkar Patil explained that he regularly maintained books of accounts and earned some meager profit. Mr.Anil Dinkar Patil requested that one more opportunity may kindly be provided, so that he will explain all the facts to the Assessing Officer. Mr.Anil Dinkar
Patil invited our attention to the Medical Certificate issued by Civil
Surgeon which is in the paper book at page no.72. Ld.AR submitted a paper book and he admitted that it is additional evidence. Ld.AR pleaded for admission of additional evidence. Ld.AR further submitted that the paper book contains copies of cash book, cash flow statement, copies of bills to demonstrate the business carried by assessee, copy of Audit Report. Ld.AR submitted that these documents are absolutely essential to decide the case of the assessee.
ITA No.474/PUN/2025 [A]
Submission of ld.DR :
The ld.DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A).
Findings & Analysis :
We have heard both the parties and perused the records. It is a fact that Assessee could not file replies to the notices issued by AO/ld.CIT(A). However, after hearing Mr.Anil Dinkar Patil, we are convinced that there is valid and sufficient reason for non- compliance. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we set- aside the assessment order to the Assessing Officer for denovo adjudication. The Assessing Officer shall provide opportunity to the assessee. The assessee shall file all the necessary details, documents before the Assessing Officer. We admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee, but since we are setting aside the assessment order for denovo adjudication, we direct the Assessee to file all these details before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall consider all the documents, details filed by the assessee before passing the assessment order. Accordingly, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose.
ITA No.474/PUN/2025 [A]
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 9th April, 2025. (VINAY BHAMORE) (DIPAK P.RIPOTE)
JUDICIAL MEMBER
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 9th April, 2025/ SGR
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.