Ashok Dattatray Mutkule Vs ITO (ITAT Pune)
Pune ITAT: ₹32.61 Lakh Addition for Online Gaming Loss Remanded – Credit Card & Bank Payments Cannot Be Treated as Unexplained Without Verification
In Ashok Dattatray Mutkule v. ITO, the Pune ITAT dealt with an addition of ₹32,61,129 under section 69A arising from transactions on an online gaming portal operated by Gameskraft Technologies Pvt. Ltd. The assessee, an employee of Siemens Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., had incurred a gaming loss of ₹76.60 lakh.
The Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to explain the source of funds used for the gaming transactions. The assessee explained that the payments had been made primarily through Axis Bank, SBI and HDFC credit cards and savings bank accounts. However, the AO accepted the source only to the extent of ₹43.92 lakh and treated the balance ₹32.61 lakh as unexplained money, which was confirmed by the CIT(A).
Before the Tribunal, the assessee produced details showing aggregate payments of ₹80,36,738, comprising Axis Bank credit card ₹20.99 lakh, SBI credit card ₹6.39 lakh, HDFC credit card ₹43.92 lakh and payments from two savings accounts aggregating about ₹9.04 lakh.
The ITAT found that the lower authorities had not examined the Axis Bank credit card, SBI credit card and savings-bank-account transactions. It therefore held that these sources required proper verification rather than being summarily treated as unexplained. The matter was restored to the jurisdictional AO for verification, with a direction to decide it in accordance with law if the details were found correct and to provide the assessee reasonable opportunity of hearing.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2022-23 is directed against the order dated 11.03.2026 of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) arising out of Assessment order 21.03.2024 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Act.
2. The sole grievance of the assessee revolves around the addition for unexplained cash deposit u/s.69A of the Act at Rs.32,61,129/-.
3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is an individual employed with Siemens Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Income of Rs.14,48,418/- declared in the return for A.Y. 2022- 23 e-filed on 31.07.2022. Based on the information about the transaction of the assessee carried out on a gaming portal managed by M/s. Gameskraft Technologies Pvt. Ltd., case of the assessee selected for scrutiny. Ld. Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has incurred loss of Rs.76,60,735/- and when asked about the source of the amount paid to M/s. Gameskraft Technologies Pvt. Ltd., resulting into loss, it was stated that the assessee has paid the amount mainly through his credit cards held with Axis bank, State Bank of India, HDFC and from saving bank account. However, ld. Assessing Officer only accepted the source of payment to the tune of Rs.43,92,871/- and for the remaining amount of loss of Rs.32,61,129/- ld. Assessing Officer has inferred it to be unexplained money and made addition thereof. Assessee failed to get any relief before ld.CIT(A).
4. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has referred to the detailed paper book running into 259 pages and has specifically to page 132 where the details of credit cards and savings bank account are placed and it has been stated that Rs.80,36,738/- has been paid through them which are sufficient to demonstrate to explain the source of funds paid on Gaming Portal resulting into loss incurred by the assessee. The details are reproduced below :
| Sl.No. | Payment Mode/Source | A/c. No. | Amount |
| 1. | Axis Bank credit card | – | 20,99,667 |
| 2. | Saving Account | 71140055768 | 1,74,900 |
| 3. | Saving Account | 710502252485 | 7,29,500 |
| 4. | SBI credit card | 6,39,800 | |
| 5. | HDFC credit card | 43,92,871 |
5. We note that the details relating to Axis bank credit card, State bank of India credit card and Saving bank account have not been examined by the lower authorities and therefore we deem it appropriate to restore this issue to the file of ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for necessary verification and if found to be correct then to decide in accordance with law. Needless to mention that ld. JAO in the set aside proceedings shall allow reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Impugned order passed by ld.CIT(A) is set aside and the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 07th day of August, 2026.
