Dhanashree Sandeep Shete Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
44AD Applied on Govt Charges? -Stamp Duty Facilitator Case- ITAT Pune Sends Matter Back, Citing Acceptance in 8 Later Years
Assessee, an individual engaged in document-writing & facilitating stamp-duty payments for clients, did not file return for AY 2017-18. AO noticed cash deposits of ₹2,31,14,300 in her current account & reopened the case u/s 147/148. Assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s 144/144B determining income at ₹43,87,750 by treating bank deposits as income.
Before CIT(A)/NFAC, Assessee explained that major receipts consisted of stamp duty, registration charges & government levies collected from clients on a pass-through basis. CIT(A) partly accepted this but, invoking a “thumb-rule” of s.44AD, estimated income at 8% of total bank credits and sustained income at ₹20,38,788.
Before Tribunal, Assessee argued that her business model is identical to her husband’s case where scrutiny assessments for the same period were accepted without any addition, and further that for AYs 2018-19 to 2025-26 the Department accepted her returns as filed although identical transactions continued. It was submitted that applying s.44AD to government-collected statutory charges was unjustified.
Tribunal noted that CIT(A) had accepted presence of government-related deposits yet applied s.44AD mechanically. Tribunal also recorded that Revenue could not dispute the fact that in subsequent eight years Department accepted the Assessee’s income as declared, despite identical operational pattern. Considering these facts, Tribunal held that the matter required fresh examination in light of subsequent assessments, supporting documents & business model. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A)/NFAC was set aside and the matter remanded for denovo adjudication after granting proper opportunity. Assessee was directed to furnish all relevant evidences including subsequent years’ returns. Appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
