आदेश/ ORDER

PER DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM :

This is an appeal filed by the Assessee Ranjit Chandrakant Pandit against the Order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (Act) passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (appeal) for AY 2018-19 dated 26/05/2025 emanating from Assessment Order u/s147 rws 144B of the Income Tax Act 1961dated 05/03/2024.

2) Submission of the Ld.AR : Ld. Authorized Representative of the Assessee filed a paper book. Ld.AR filed a written submission . Gist of the submission is as under :

2.1) Ld.AR submitted that the Assessee is a Salaried employee of Shiv sharda Multi State Cooperative Credit Society Ltd earning annual salary of Rs.2,04,000/-. Since the amount was below taxable Assessee was not required to file Return of Income for AY 2018-19.

2.2) Assessee had obtained Information under Right to Information Act which assessee filed in the paper book. Ld.AR submitted that there were wrong Information with the Income Tax Department regarding Cash deposits by Assessee. Ld.AR invited our attention to the Information Obtained under RTI to demonstrate that the SO CALLed Information DID NOT mention any Bank Name. Ld.AR further submitted that it had been admitted by the Income Tax Department under RTI that the AO had not carried out any inquiry before issue of Notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961. Ld.AR pleaded that the AO issued notice u/s 148 based on some Vague Information which were not pertaining to the Assessee.

2.3) The Notice u/s 148 dated 07/04/2022 and Order u/s 148A(d) dated 06/04/2022 have been approved by Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax where asas per section 151(ii) Approval of Pr.Chief Commissioner of Income Tax was required.Ld AR pleaded that the Notice u/s 148 and Order u/s 148A(d) are Bad in law. He relied on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and ITAT Pune.

2.4) Ld.AR also pleaded that the Notice u/s 148A(b) and Notice u/s 148 have been issued on Incorrect Fact. The Account did not belong to the assessee and Assessee have no connection to the deposits made in the said account amounting Rs.3,01,16,000/- .Ld.AR submitted that the Assessing Officer during Assessment Proceedings accepted that the Account do not belong to the Assessee. Ld.AR submitted that hence the Notice u/s 148 is bad in law as it is based on Incorrect facts. Also the approving authority has not applied mind hence Approval is bad in law.

2.5) The AO has made addition of Rs. 3,03,350/- u/s 69A though elaborate submission was made. During the year there were cash deposits of Rs.3,03,350/- in the assessee’s saving account. It was explained that the deposits are from Agricultural Income of ancestral agricultural land. Assessee filed copy of revenue record 7/12 during assessment proceedings.

2.6) The AO has made addition on an issue which was not the subject of reopening hence the Addition is legally bad in law.

3) Submission of DR : Ld. Departmental Representative,who was on Rotation Duty ,relied on the order of the AO and CIT(A).Ld.DR could not rebut any of the facts mentioned by Ld.AR.

4) Findings and Analysis :

We have heard both the parties and perused the records.

4.1) The undisputed fact is that the Assessee was a salaried employee during the year and had earned Salary Income of Rs. 2,04,000/-. Assessee had filed Form 16 issued by the employer and said fact has been accepted by the AO. Since the Income was below the taxable limit the Assessee was not required to file the Return of Income for the year and hence, he had rightly not filed Return of Income for the year.

4.2) The ITO ward 1(5) Aurangabad issued Notice u/s 148 dated 22/03/22 for AY 2018-19 based on so called information on the Insight Portal. At pag