Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA
Date of Hearing : 26.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 10.05.2024 ORDER
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012-13, arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1057676539(1), dated 03.11.2023, in proceedings u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).
Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.
I have heard learned DR and perused the case file.
Suffice to say, the Assessing Officer’s herein had initiated sec.148/147 proceedings against the assessee after recording reasons to believe that he had deposited cash of 2 ITA.No.5/PUN./2024 Rs.25,01,100/- in Vishweshwar Sahakari Bank Ltd., Pune in the relevant previous year Learned DR fails to dispute the clinching fact that the impugned re-assessment dated 26.12.2019 had assessed the assessee’s alleged customer advance(s) in tuition activity(ies) of Rs.63,52,600/- after deducting 35% thereof as the corresponding expenditure; resulting in the impugned addition of Rs.41,29,190/- as well as interest of Rs.1,76,082/- received from fixed deposits with M/s. Baramati Sahakari Bank Ltd.; respectively. That being the case, there is no addition made regarding the foregoing sole reason of reopening. Faced with this situation, I quote CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd., [2011] 331 ITR 236 (Bom.) that the impugned reopening/re-assessment itself is not sustainable in law once the learned Assessing Officer had not added the foregoing sum of Rs.25,01,100/- (supra). Ordered accordingly.
All other pleadings on merits stand rendered academic.
This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms.