PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO - WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

money deposited in the bank is already recorded in his books of accounts. Therefore, section 69A has no application. 17. It is submitted that out of the total deposits of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-, the CIT(A) in para 50 of his order dated 18/9/2024 has directed the AO to estimate turnover @8% on receipt

PRASAD RAMCHANDRA PATIL,URAN, PANVEL vs. ITO WARD 3, PANVEL, PANVEL

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

money deposited in the bank is already recorded in his books of accounts. Therefore, section 69A has no application. 17. It is submitted that out of the total deposits of Rs. 1,24,69,339/-, the CIT(A) in para 50 of his order dated 18/9/2024 has directed the AO to estimate turnover @8% on receipt

RAJESH BABURAO SHINDE,PARBHANI vs. ITO, WARD- HINGOLI, HINGOLI

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.781/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rajesh Baburao Shinde, Vs. Assessment Unit, Income Sayala Khating, Tq. Dist. Tax Department, Nfac, Parbhani- 431402. Delhi. Pan : Czcps6546Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Shubham N. Rathi Revenue By : Shri Akhilesh Srivastva Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12.08.2025 : आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 18.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After

reassessment proceedings. Therefore, notice issued u/s 148 and the consequential assessment order passed is illegal and deserves to be quashed. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO ABOVE 2. THE NOTICE U/S 148 IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 151A 2.1 The Ld. JAO has erred in assuming the jurisdiction to issue the notice u/s 148 which is in non-compliance

MRS NEHA VITTHAL DIMBLE,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-3(3), PUNE, PUNE

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

reassessment proceedings\nwhich constrained the Ld. AO to complete the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s.144B\nof the Act on 19.02.2024 at an assessed income of Rs.83,31,620/- by making\naddition of - (i) Rs.66,65,000/- in respect of cash deposits in bank treating the\nsame as unexplained money

AMBALAL GORAKH CHOUDHARI,PRAKASHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, DHULE, DHULE

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1422/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ambalal Gorakh Choudhari Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Dhule. Legal Heir Anita Ambalal Chaudhari, Mukteshwar Mandir, At Post Prakasha, Taluka Shahada, Dist. Nandurbar- 425409. Pan : Afrpc1304D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Rathi Revenue By : Shri Harshit Bari Date Of Hearing : 19.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.03.2025 Passed By Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-2, Gurugram [‘Ld. Cit(A)’] For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, Learned Assessing Officer & The Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Making/Confirming Additions Of Rs. 1020740/- To Returned Income U/S.69A Of The Act, As Said Section Is Applicable Only When In Any Financial Year The Assessee Is Found To Be Owner Of Any Money, Bullion, Jewellery Or Any Other

unexplained money can be brought to tax if it is not recorded in books of accounts and assessee offers no explanation about nature and source of acquisition of money. Deposits were made in disclosed bank account of assessee as nowhere in assessment order it is mentioned that concerned bank account of assessee was not disclosed/considered while filing return of income

SACHIN BADRINARAYAN SOMANI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD , HINGOLI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2112 & 2113/Pun/2025 धििेंारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sachin Badrinarayan Somani, Ito Ward, Hingoli Rathi Rathi & Co., 501-504, Akshay Landmarks, Oppo. Pu Vs. La Garden, Sinhagad Road, Pune-411030 Maharashtra Pan-Cncps2724N अपीलेंर्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By: Shri Nemin Shah Department By: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk-Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing: 18-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23-12-2025 आदीश /Order

reassessment proceedings upheld by the Learned CIT(A) against the appellant is time barred and hence ought to be quashed. Ground 3- Without prejudice to Ground 2, the Learned CIT(A), has erred in maintaining the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs. 2,32,53,205/-as unexplained money

SACHIN BADRINARAYAN SOMANI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD , HINGOLI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2112 & 2113/Pun/2025 धििेंारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sachin Badrinarayan Somani, Ito Ward, Hingoli Rathi Rathi & Co., 501-504, Akshay Landmarks, Oppo. Pu Vs. La Garden, Sinhagad Road, Pune-411030 Maharashtra Pan-Cncps2724N अपीलेंर्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee By: Shri Nemin Shah Department By: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk-Addl. Cit Date Of Hearing: 18-12-2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23-12-2025 आदीश /Order

reassessment proceedings upheld by the Learned CIT(A) against the appellant is time barred and hence ought to be quashed. Ground 3- Without prejudice to Ground 2, the Learned CIT(A), has erred in maintaining the addition made by the Ld. AO of Rs. 2,32,53,205/-as unexplained money

INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1,AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR vs. ATUL ASHOK PARAKH, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee both are dismissed

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

unexplained money and added back the same to the total income of the assessee u/s 69 of the Act. 6. A show cause notice dated 23.03.2022 with a copy of draft assessment order was sent to the assessee requiring him to furnish reply or raise objection, if any, in respect of addition proposed u/s 69 of the Act as stated

GEETANJALI ANIL KANKREJ,KOPARGAON vs. ITO, WARD-1, AHMEDNAGAR, AHMEDNAGAR

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1104/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Geetanjali Anil Kankrej, Vs. Ito, Ward-1, M/S. Kishor Wines, Jadhav Ahmednagar. Building, Dharangaon Road, Tal. Kopargaon- 423109. Pan : Agxpk9352L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Uodol Raj Singh Date Of Hearing : 12.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23.04.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Whether On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Valid In Law In Absence Of Reason To Believe That Any Income Has Escaped Assessment When The Ld Ao Himself States That Notice U/S 148 Is Issued To Verify & Make Enquiry

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 valid in law in absence of any tangible material to indicate any escapement of income in the hands of the appellant. 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case, the ld AO having accepted the fact that cash deposit in bank account has been duly disclosed and return of income being duly filed, the reopening

SUNIL SHRIRANG PAWAR,SATARA vs. ITO WARD 2 SATARA, SATARA

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1124 To 1127/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income tax Act 1961 without considering factual and legal position of law. As the issues are not decided on merits of the case, the orders passed by both the Authorities may be set aside and matter be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with proper & adequate opportunity of being

SUNIL SHRIRANG PAWAR,SATARA vs. ITO WARD 2 SATARA , SATARA

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1124 To 1127/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income tax Act 1961 without considering factual and legal position of law. As the issues are not decided on merits of the case, the orders passed by both the Authorities may be set aside and matter be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with proper & adequate opportunity of being

SUNIL SHRIRANG PAWAR,SATARA vs. ITO WARD 2 SATARA, SATARA

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1124 To 1127/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income tax Act 1961 without considering factual and legal position of law. As the issues are not decided on merits of the case, the orders passed by both the Authorities may be set aside and matter be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with proper & adequate opportunity of being

SUNIL SHRIRANG PAWAR,SATARA vs. ITO WARD 2 SATARA, SATARA

In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1124 To 1127/Pun/2025 Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18

unexplained money u/s 69A of the Income tax Act 1961 without considering factual and legal position of law. As the issues are not decided on merits of the case, the orders passed by both the Authorities may be set aside and matter be restored back to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication with proper & adequate opportunity of being

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 PANDHARPUR, PANDHARPUR vs. MOHOL NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPURVATHA SANSTHA MARYADIT , MOHOL

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

unexplained money, was directed to verify the availability of cash on the date of deposit in the banks and reframe the assessment. 10. Later, after considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC vide order dated 19.01.2025 partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 16-12-2019 passed

MOHOL NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPURVATHA SANSTHA MARYADIT,SOLAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2, PANDHARPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

unexplained money, was directed to verify the availability of cash on the date of deposit in the banks and reframe the assessment. 10. Later, after considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC vide order dated 19.01.2025 partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 16-12-2019 passed

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 PANDHARPUR, PANDHARPUR vs. MOHOL NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPURVAGHA SANSTHA MARYADIT, MOHOL

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

unexplained money, was directed to verify the availability of cash on the date of deposit in the banks and reframe the assessment. 10. Later, after considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC vide order dated 19.01.2025 partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 16-12-2019 passed

MOHOL NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPURVATHA SANSTHA MARYADIT,SOLAPUR vs. ITO WARD 2, PANDHARPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

unexplained money, was directed to verify the availability of cash on the date of deposit in the banks and reframe the assessment. 10. Later, after considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC vide order dated 19.01.2025 partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 16-12-2019 passed

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 PANDHARPUR, PANDHARPUR vs. MOHOL NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPURAVATHA SASTHA MARYADIT, MOHOL

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

unexplained money, was directed to verify the availability of cash on the date of deposit in the banks and reframe the assessment. 10. Later, after considering the reply of the assessee, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC vide order dated 19.01.2025 partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 16-12-2019 passed