Chandrakant Pandharinath Hande Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Assessee, a small-scale commission agent dealing in sale & purchase of lands, filed appeal against the order of NFAC-CIT(A). The appeal challenged confirmation of an addition of ₹ 9,53,539 made by AO towards commission income, which had been treated as income outside the presumptive provisions of Section 44AD.
Assessee had not filed return for A.Y. 2013-14. The case was reopened u/s 148. In response, he filed return on 29-11-2019 declaring total income of ₹ 3,23,225 on presumptive basis u/s 44AD & claime refund of ₹ 1,20,760.
During reassessment, the AO held that Section 44AD does not apply to commission income, which is neither business turnover nor gross receipts from eligible business. Considering that the total commission receipts were ₹ 12,71,386, AO taxed the difference of ₹ 9,53,539 as additional income. Assessment was completed u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) determining total income of ₹ 12,76,760.
Assessee contended that the entire commission had already been accounted for while declaring presumptive income & that the AO’s approach resulted in double taxation of the same income.
NFAC-CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, observing non-compliance with hearing notices issued on 06-08-2024, 17-12-2024 & 05-03-2025. Assessee, however, explained that an adjournment request dated 27-01-2021 had been made due to lockdown & quarantine during the Covid-19 pandemic,& that no subsequent notices were received. Despite this, the appeal was dismissed without adjudicating merits.
