Krunal Kailash Kapoor Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
In the case of Krunal Kailash Kapoor vs. ITO, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Pune addressed an appeal regarding an assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2016-17. The taxpayer, an employee of SUD Life Insurance Company Ltd, had his income tax return scrutinized due to cash deposits totaling ₹12,62,500 in his bank accounts. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these deposits as unexplained income, which was upheld by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] due to the taxpayer’s non-appearance. The taxpayer claimed that hearing notices sent to his registered email went unnoticed as he did not regularly check emails. ITAT Pune found merit in this explanation and deemed that the taxpayer was prevented from presenting his case. Consequently, ITAT remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, instructing the authority to provide a new opportunity for the taxpayer to be heard, ensuring the process aligns with legal standards.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
This appeal of the assessee impugns the DIN & Order No. ITBA/APLS/S/250/2023-24/1063500147(1) dt. 27/03/2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] by the Addl/Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax [‘CIT(A)/NFAC’ hereinafter] passed which in turn confirmed the order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Nashik [‘AO’ hereinafter] for assessment year 2016-17 [‘AY’ hereinafter];
