##PAGE1##

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE BENCH “A”

BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND

SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.522/PUN/2026

(Assessment Year: 2015-16)

Kamaljeetsingh Tajasingh ITO, Ward 13(1), Aujla, 7^th floor, Aayakar

Sadan, Bodhi Tower, 365, Shivaji Nagar, Pune

548/2B, Salisbury Pune-411005 Vs.

Park, Gultekdi, Maharashtra. Pune-411037,

PAN: AELPA7054B Maharashtra.

(Appellant) (Respondent)

For Assessee : Shri Anup Ashok Ladda .AR (Virtual)

For Revenue : Shri Rajesh Haladkar.Sr.DR

Date of Hearing : 30.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 11.08.2026

ORDER

PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of

NFAC/CIT(A) passed u/sec 250 of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the ex-parte order of the CIT(A)

and sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer.

2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that there is a delay of 63 days in filing the appeal before Hon’ble Tribunal and the delay was not intentional and the assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. On consideration of facts and information mentioned in the affidavit, there is a reasonable cause explained and the Ld. DR. has no specific

2

ITA.No.522/PUN/2026 Kamaljeetsingh Tajasingh Aujla

objections. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted.

3. The brief facts of the case are that, Assessing Officer (A.O) has received information that the assessee has made cash deposits and time deposits in the bank accounts and also purchased the immovable property in the F.Y.2014-15 and the assessee has not filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2015-16. The A.O has reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and fallowed the due process of law and issued notice u/sec 148 of the Act and there was no compliance. Further, notice u/sec 142(1) of the Act was issued on various dates and show cause notices to file the submissions/evidences in support of the transactions of cash deposits and acquisition of property and there was no response. The A.O find that the assessee has not made submissions on the disputed issues in spite of providing adequate opportunities of hearing and finally the A.O considering the information available on record has invoked the provisions of section 144 of the Act and made addition of (i) time deposits as unexplained investment of Rs. 10,00,000/-(ii) bank interest income of Rs.3,000/- (iii) unexplained investment in property of Rs. 42,26,000/- (iv) salary income of Rs. 2,59,000/- and(v) unexplained cash deposits of Rs.5,08,000/- and assessed the total income of Rs. 59,96,000/- and passed the order u/sec 147 r.w.s.144

r.w.s144B of the Income Tax Act dated 02.03.2024.

4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A).Whereas the CIT (A) has considered grounds of appeal, statement of facts, finding of the A.O and has issued notice of hearing and since there was no compliance, CIT(A) considering the information on record has confirmed the

3

ITA.No.522/PUN/2026 Kamaljeetsingh Tajasingh Aujla

action of the Assessing officer and dismissed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has

filed appeal with Hon’ble Tribunal.

5. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the AO overlooking the information of the assessment proceedings and the Ld.AR mentioned that non-compliance of notices before the CIT(A) is not a wanton act but circumstances beyond the control of the assessee and the assessee has a good case on merits and shall substantiate with material evidences and prayed for an opportunity before the Lower authorities. Per contra, the

Ld.DR supported the order of CIT(A).

6. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Prima facie CIT(A) has passed the order considering the facts that there is no compliance in spite of providing a