Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
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.