SACHIN PRAKASHCHAND AANCHALIYA,AURANGABAD vs. ITO WARD 1 (1), AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal.”

reassessment proceedings under Section 147, read with Section 1448 of the Income Tax Act. 8.3 It is pertinent to add here that laws assist those who are vigilant and not those who sleep over their rights. This principle is embodied in the well-known maxim "Vigilantibus non dormientibusjurasubveniunt. It means equity comes to the aid of the vigilant

ANWAR HUSAIN MEHBOOB SHAIKH,JALGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2561/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Anwar Husain Mehboob V The Income Tax Officer, Shaikh, S Jalgaon. H. No.K 258/I Railway North Area, Bhusawal, Jalgaon – 425201. Pan: Bodps9742F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe - Dr Date Of Hearing 10/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2018-19 Dated 21.08.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Of The Act, Dated 31.01.2024. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

reassessment of income for the AY 2018-19 was wrongly issued by by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer instead of Faceless Assessing Officer. 2. That the Jurisdictional AO has under section 148 of the Act. Excess is authority by issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 3. That the notice issued under section 148 violates the section 151A and 144B

SACHIN SHANTILAL KHIWANSARA,BEED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2288/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sachin Shantilal Khiwansara, V The Income Tax Officer, Main Road, Shirur Kasar, S. Ward-1(5), Aurangabad. Shirur So., Beed, Beed – 413249. Pan: Bytpk1339N Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Saurabh D.Khivansara Revenue By Smt Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commisioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2016-17 Dated 17.07.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. That On Facts & In Law, The Ex-Parte Order Of Ld. Cit Appeals, Nfac Is Opposed To Law & Against The Principles Of Natural Justice & Accordingly The Impugned Appellate Order Is Liable To Be Set Aside.

reassessment notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act without complying with the provisions and due procedure of law, the reopening of assessment 2 ITA No.2288/PUN/2025 [A] under Section 147 of the Income tax Act is bad in law, which has to be set aside. 7. That on facts and in law, the order under section 144 r.w.s.147

SPAN CONSTRUCTION,PUNE vs. I.T.O WRD-3(3), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1346/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Span Construction, V The Income Tax Officer, H1, Flat No.203, S. Ward-3(3), Pune. S.No.123/A/1/1, Vanraji Heights, Rambaug Colony, Near Mit College, Kothrud, Pune – 411038. Maharashtra. Pan: Aaefs2589J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod S Shingte – Ar Revenue By Smt. Saumya Pandey Jain – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 07/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: The Assessee Has Filed An Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 27.03.2025 For A.Y.2017-18, Emanating From The Order U/S.147 R.W.S 144 Read With

reassessment proceedings are Void-ab-initio and any consequential order passed deserves to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law learned AO erred in passing the order under section r.w.s. 144 dated 23.03.2022 on the basis of notice under section 148 dated 30.03.2021 which appellant has not received either

SATYAPREM RAJABHAU DHOLE,BEED vs. ITO, WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

reassessment proceedings. Since, the assessment was complete ex-parte u/s 144 of the Act by the Ld. AO, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC set aside the assessment order passed by the Ld. AO for making fresh assessment under the newly inserted proviso to section 251

DATTAPRASAD RADHAKISAN REVGADE,HIVARGAON vs. ITO WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra, Judicialmember & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1897/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Dattaprasad Radhakisan V The Income Tax Officer, Revgade, S Ward-2, Ahmednagar. At Hivargaon Post Dongargaon, Tal Aklole, Ahmednagar – 422609. Pan: Cddpr8213C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Piyush Bafna – Ar Revenue By Shri Ambarnath Khule – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal(Nfac) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2018-19 Dated 23.06.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961

reassessment proceedings initiated pursuant to such defective notice are liable to be quashed. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to other grounds, the assessment order passed under section 147 r.ws 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is bad in law and void 3 ITA No.1897/PUN/2025 [A] ab initio

SAVITA MITKARI,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose

reassessed under Section 143(3) read with\nSection 147. The Assessing Officer made additions of *10,00,000 as\nunexplained unsecured loan under Section 68 and 17,35,000 as\nunexplained cash deposits. The appellant filed an appeal before the\nCIT(A), Chennai, which was dismissed exparte on 30/07/2025 without\nconsidering the merits or documentary evidence on record\nThat

MORE DESHPANDE AND ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 4(5)- PUNE, PUNE

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.924/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 More Deshpande & Associates, Vs Dcit, Circle-4(5), 113, 114, Nana Peth, Pune-411002 Pune Pan : Aabfm9425G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing 26/08/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 28/08/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals) [Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 14.03.2024 For The A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. In View Of The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Assessing Officer Was Not Justified In Making The Addition To Income As Ltcg On Sale Of Property Of Rs.2,02,94,900/- Under Section 43Ca Of The Act. More Deshpande & Associates

reassessment denovo in accordance with the law. 3. The appellant craves for leave to add/modify/alter/delete and or amend any grounds of appeal.” 3. At the time of hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee. Submission of ld. Departmental Representative (ld. DR) : 4. The ld. DR for the Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer

MANDA SHANTARAM GARADE,TALEGAON DABHADE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 9(3), AKURDI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1343/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Manda Shantaram Garade, V The Assessing Officer, 66, Dhamane Gavthan, Near S Ward-9(3), Pune. Padmavati Mandir, Talegaon, Maharashtra – 410506. Pan: Bjcpg4762K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Nishit Gandhi(Virtual), Aadnya Bhandari(Present In Itat Pune Bench) Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 26.03.2025 For The A.Y.2019-20 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act

REASSESSMENT: 1.1 In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeals Centre ["Ld. CIT(A)" for short) erred in confirming the re-assessment order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["the Act" for short] passed by the Learned Income Tax Officer-9 (3), Pune

SAURABH JAYANT BHAGAT,PANVEL RAIGAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO PANVEL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2717 & 2718/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Saurabh Jayant Bhagat, The Income Tax Officer, A-806, Balaji Aangan, Nr. S T V Panvel. Depot, Panvel Raigad–410206. S. Maharashtra. Pan: Aklpb9996P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Gaurang Khakhkhar – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar & Shri Vinod Pawar – Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, Date 31.05.2024 For The A.Y.2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) The Honorable Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Without Communicating The Reason For Reopening Of Assessment.

reassessment order with the above referred addition after issuing draft assessment order wherein null addition is proposed by Ld' Assessing officer. 6) That the order passed by the Ld.CIT u/s.250 of the I.T.Act, 1961 was arbitrary, bad in law and unjust. 7) That the assessee craves leave to urge such other ground or grounds before or at the time

SAURABH JAYANT BHAGA,RAIGAD PANVEL vs. ITO WARD-1, PANVEL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2717 & 2718/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Saurabh Jayant Bhagat, The Income Tax Officer, A-806, Balaji Aangan, Nr. S T V Panvel. Depot, Panvel Raigad–410206. S. Maharashtra. Pan: Aklpb9996P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Gaurang Khakhkhar – Ar(Virtual) Revenue By Shri Abhinay Kumbhar & Shri Vinod Pawar – Dr Date Of Hearing 05/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 07/05/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commssioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act, Date 31.05.2024 For The A.Y.2013-14. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) The Honorable Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) Has Erred In Law As Well As On Facts In Upholding The Reassessment Proceedings Without Communicating The Reason For Reopening Of Assessment.

reassessment order with the above referred addition after issuing draft assessment order wherein null addition is proposed by Ld' Assessing officer. 6) That the order passed by the Ld.CIT u/s.250 of the I.T.Act, 1961 was arbitrary, bad in law and unjust. 7) That the assessee craves leave to urge such other ground or grounds before or at the time

SMITA NARENDRA SONAWANE,NASHIK vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3213/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Smita Narendra Sonawane, V National Faceless Vadel, Malegaon, S Assessment Centre. Nashik – 423206 Pan: Ejtps9105Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/02/2026

reassessment order are bad in law. 3. On the facts and in law the notice issued u/s 148 on 05/04/2022 i.e. after expiry of 3 years for A.Y. 2015-16 is time barred and bad in law as per provision of section 149(1)(b) of the Act as the income allegedly escaped assessment as assessed

PRADEEP MADHUKAR THOMBARE,AURANGABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(5), AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.3237/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Pradeep Madhukar Thombre, V The Income Tax Officer, 101, Padmini Niwas, Prashant S Ward-1(5), Aurangabad. Nagar, Ambajogai – 431517. Pan: Aappt7315L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Shubham N Rathi (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Sadananda – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 11/02/2026

reassessment proceedings in the present case is without jurisdiction WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE 3. NOTICE U/S 143(2) OF THE ACT IS NOT ISSUED/SERVED ITA No.3237/PUN/2025 [A] 3.1 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the ground of challenge to an assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B passed without issuing statutory notice

SHAHBAZ MOHAMMED SHAFEEQUE,MALEGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, MALEGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2291/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shahbaz Mohammed V The Income Tax Officer, Shafeeque, S. Ward-1, Malegaon. House No.904, Lane No.2, Malegaon City S.O., Malegaon, Nashik, Malegaon – 423203. Maharashtra. Pan: Cfppm6844A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Smt Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commisioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 28.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

reassessment proceedings are void ab initio. 5) On the facts and in law the notice issued u/s 148 on 18/07/2022 by Jurisdictional AO is contrary to the CBDT mandate issued by notification dated 29/03/2022 rws 151A of the Act directing that all notices u/s 148 after 29/03/2022 shall be issued under faceless scheme and not by Jurisdictional AOs and therefore

SHAIKH NAJEEB SHAIKH ABDUL HAMEED,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.664/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Yea: 2018-19 Shaikh Najeeb Shaikh Abudul V The Income Tax Officer, Hameed, S Ward-2, Ahmednagar. Naaz Press, Dukhi Nagarm, Street No.2, Old Jalna-431203. Maharashtra. Pan: Eipps2336E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue

reassessment proceedings are bad in law and ought to be quashed. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law The learned Jurisdictional AO erred in issuing notice u/s 148A(b) of ITA, 1961 without making adequate enquiry as required as per the provisions of section 148A(a) of ITA. 1961 and thereby order passed

MOTIWALA AUTO PVT. LTD.,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, WARD1(1), AURANABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings on the ground that\nthe notice issued under Section 148 is barred by limitation. After considering\nthe submissions and documentation furnished by the assessee and in the\nunique facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC opined that\nthe order passed by the Ld. AO under Section 147 read with Section 144 of the\nAct

BAJAJ HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-8(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

251/- which is duly recorded in the books of account has been offered as ‘business income’ However, due to other expenditure incurred during the year the net income is declared as Nil on account of brought forward losses. However, during the course of assessment proceedings, assessee has suo motu filed the revised computation of income and the profit from sale

SHAMRAO GOPAL BENAKE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 1(1), PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI R. K. PANDA (Vice President), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals)] shall have the following powers- 1. in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce, enhance or annul the assessment; [Provided that where such appeal is against an order of assessment made under section 144, he may set aside the assessment and refer the case back

BABASAHEB SAHEBARAV JAGDALE,MASANARWADI LINGALI DAUND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER WARD 14(5), AAYAKAR SADAN BODHI TOWER SALISBURY PARK GULTEKDI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: CIT(A) as per clause (b) Sec 246A of the IT Act, 1961. The Learned CIT(A) further erred to hold that Appellant should have filed Appeal to ITAT.

reassessment dated 29/03/2022 and are bad in law, & void-ab-initio as held by Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Hexaware Technology. b. The Learned Assessing Officer erred both in facts as well as in law in considering entire cash withdrawal as unexplained investment u/s 69 and in treating it as undisclosed income. The information of cash withdrawal from bank does