KALPANA VIJAY KADAM,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 2(2), PUNE, PUNE
In the result, appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed
ITA 841/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 May 2025AY 2016-17
Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.841/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Kalpana Vijay Kadam, V The Income Tax Officer, Fi 13, Janki Heights, S.No.250, S. Ward-2(2), Pune. Baner D P Road, Aundh, Pune – 411007. Maharashtra. Pan: Axzpk4350P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Suhas P. Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri Manish Mehta – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 15/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 06.02.2025 For The A.Y.2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. On The Facts & In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Erred In Passing An Ex-Parte Order Without Affording A Reasonable Opportunity To The Appellant. The Order Was Solely Based On The Observations Of The Assessing Officer (Ao) In The
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69C
144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"), is bad in law and void ab initio for the following reasons:
i.
The alleged escaped income is less than Rs. 50 lakhs, rendering the reassessment proceedings invalid.
ii.
The reopening was based on mere presumption and surmises, as it was initiated on borrowed satisfaction without independent application of mind