MEGHA KISHOR DALVI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 6(1), PUNE
Facts
The assessee declared income of Rs. 1,90,000/-, but information indicated involvement in a land purchase MOU for Rs. 1.4 crore, leading to reassessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 70 lakh as unexplained investment, and the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte due to non-appearance.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to cooperate by responding to notices and providing evidence, ensuring a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte; jurisdictional validity of reassessment due to notice service; and the addition of unexplained investment under section 69.
Sections Cited
148A, 148, 147, 144, 144B, 69, 234A, 234B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: DR. MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
आदेश / ORDER PER SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 13.02.2025 passed by [„Ld. CIT(A)‟] NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2018-19.
Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:-
The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing appeal ex parte when the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause for non-compliance. 2. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned Order u/s 147 in absence of service of notice u/s 148A and 148 is invalid and void ab initio.
2 ITA No.955/PUN/2025 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the service of notice u/s 148A and 148 is a jurisdictional condition and non-compliance of the same would render the entire assessment invalid and void ab initio. 4. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs. 70,00,000/- without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. On facts and circumstances of case and in law, learned CIT(A) erred in charging and leaving interest under section 234A and 2348. 6. Your Appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, modify and/ or delete any or all of the above said ground(s) of Appeal.
Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is an individual and has furnished return of income for the year under consideration declaring an income of Rs. 1,90,000/- only. On the basis of information that the assessee along with one other have executed a MOU for purchase of land for a consideration of Rs.1,40,00,000/- and has shown only an income of Rs. 1,90,000/-, notice under section 148A of the IT Act was issued to the assessee. After passing order under section 148 A(d) of the IT act notice under section 148 of the IT act was issued to the assessee. The assessee neither furnished any return in response to above notice nor any reply was filed. The assessing officer completed the assessment proceedings under section 147 read with section 144 read with section 144B of the IT Act and vide order dated 13th February 2024 determined total income of Rs. 71,90,000/- as against the income of Rs. 1,90,000/- returned by the assessee. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs. 70 lakh being (1/2 of Rs. 1,40,00,000/-) her share of unexplained investment in the purchase of immovable property under section 69 of the IT act.
Being aggrieved with the above assessment order the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A). Since the assessee remained absent learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
3 ITA No.955/PUN/2025 6. We have heard learned counsel’s from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard we find that learned CIT(A) has decided the appeal ex-parte since the assessee could not appear before him. In this regard it is the soul contention of learned counsel of the assessee that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause for not appearing before the learned CIT(A) and therefore it was prayed that the matter may kindly be restored back to the file of the assessing officer so that the assessee can explain her case before the assessing officer.
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case we deem it appropriate to set aside the ex parte order passed by learned CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of learned CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assesse. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by learned CIT(A) and to produce evidences/documents/submissions in support of grounds of appeal without taking any adjournment under any pretext otherwise learned CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 17th day of March, 2026.
Sd/- Sd/- (MANISH BORAD) (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 17th March, 2026. Neeta
4 ITA No.955/PUN/2025
आिेश की प्रतितितप अग्रेतिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीि र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. 3. The Pr. CIT/CIT concerned. तिभ गीय प्रतितनति, आयकर अपीिीय अतिकरण, “A” बेंच, 4. पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune.
ग र्ड फ़ इि / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीिीय अतिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.
