PUSHPA RAVINDRA KODLIKERI,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.615/PUN./2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018
Pushpa Ravindra The Income Tax Officer, Kodlikeri, Plot No.8-9, Ward – 1 (1), 2nd Floor, Manjeet Nagar, Opp. LIC Building, Cannought Place, Akashwani, Jalna Road, vs. Jalgaon Rd, AURANGABAD. AURANGABAD – 431 001. PIN - 431 003. Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN ABGPK0427N (Appellant) (Respondent)
For Assessee : Shri Kishor B. Phadke For Revenue : Shri Kalpesh Kumar Rupavatiya
Date of Hearing : 09.05.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 28.05.2024 ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2017-18,
arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short
the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/
2023-24/1060237031(1), dated 29.01.2024, in proceedings
u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the
Act”).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance
raised in the instant appeal that the Assessing Officer has
erred in law and on facts in initiating sec.148A/148
proceedings vide corresponding notice dated 21.07.2022; it
2 ITA.No.615/PUN./2024
emerges at the outset that the only addition made herein is of
Rs.13,03,650/- i.e., less than the prescribed amount of Rs.50
lakhs or more, u/sec.149(1)(b); as amended vide Finance Act,
2021 w.e.f. 01.04.2021. Their lordships’ latest decision
Hexaware Technologies Ltd. vs. ACIT [2024] 162 taxmann.com
225 (Bombay); has already rejected the Revenue’s stand
seeking to apply “roll-over” principle for the purpose of treating
the impugned reopening notice herein to have been issued
under the erstwhile un-amended statutory provision
applicable before 01.04.2021. Faced with this pecuniary
aspect of the impugned reopening herein involving the
assessee’s taxable income of less than Rs.50 lakhs as
prescribed hereinabove; I adopt stricter interpretation
Commissioner of Customs vs. Dilip Kumar And Co. & Ors.
[2018] 9 SCC 1 (SC) (FB) to quash the same in very terms.
Ordered accordingly.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 28.05.2024.
Sd/- [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 28th May, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Pune concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “SMC” Bench, Pune. 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy //
Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.
