Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Pune
Dipali Murlidhar Todkar,Pune vs Ito Ward 13(1), Pune, Pune on 30 April, 2026
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
PUNE BENCHES "SMC", PUNE
BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.3003/PUN/2025
Assessment Year : 2015-16
Dipali Murlidhar Todkar, Vs. Income Tax Officer,
10, Adarsha Nagar, Ward-13(1), Pune
Satara Road, Pune 411037
Maharashtra
PAN : AFTPT1241A
Appellant Respondent
Assessee by : Shri Gaurang Khakhkhar
(Virtual
Revenue by : Shri Dayanand Jawalikar
(Virtual)
Date of hearing : 11.03.2026
Date of pronouncement : 30.04.2026
आदे श / ORDER
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 29.11.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Penalty Order dated 27.09.2024 passed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
2. Assessee has raised various legal issues challenging the levy of penalty at Rs.1,43,166/- u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act along with raising grounds on merit. Submissions were made on all the grounds. I however proceed to adjudicate the issue on merits regarding levy of penalty on the addition for unexplained credit card payment at Rs.4,63,320/-.
3. I have heard the rival contentions and perused the record placed before me. Assessee is an individual and in 2 ITA No.3003/PUN/2025 Dipali Murlidhar Todkar the assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 various additions were made including the addition for unexplained credit card payment of Rs.4,63,320/-. Ld. Assessing Officer has alleged that assessee failed to explain the source of making the payment for credit cards. In the penalty proceedings, ld. Assessing Officer levied penalty of Rs.1,43,166/- which has been confirmed by ld.CIT(A).
4. On going through the submissions filed by the assessee before ld.CIT(A) as well as submissions filed before this Tribunal, I observe that the assessee is engaged in the business of outdoor catering services and income has been offered under the presumptive taxation scheme u/s.44AD of the Act on the gross receipts at Rs.18.74 lakhs. It has been consistently contended that against the gross receipts, assessee had to incur various expenses of which some were made through credit card. I observe that ld. Assessing Officer has accepted the assessee's income offered under the presumptive taxation scheme u/s.44AD of the Act and therefore this contention of the assessee find support that against gross receipts the expenditure has to be incurred and there being no requirement of maintaining regular books of account and even if 8% of Rs.18.74 lakhs is considered as net profit then also there is expenditure of Rs.17.24 lakhs. Therefore, the credit card payment of Rs.4,63,320/- is accepted to have been made for business purposes and the source of such payment is from the gross receipts of Rs.18.74 lakhs declared by the assessee and accepted by the Revenue. Under these given facts and 3 ITA No.3003/PUN/2025 Dipali Murlidhar Todkar circumstances, the impugned penalty of Rs.1,43,166/- does not survive and the same is hereby deleted.
5. Since I have already deleted the addition, dealing with the remaining grounds raised by the assessee would be merely academic in nature.
6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as per terms indicated hereinabove.
Order pronounced on this 30th day of April, 2026.
Sd/-
(MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 30th April, 2026. Satish Satish Kumar Madishetty Digitally signed by Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.04.30 16:05:48 +05'30' आदे श की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant.
2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
3. The Pr. CIT concerned.
4. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, "SMC" बेंच, पण ु े / DR, ITAT, "SMC" Bench, Pune.
5. ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File.
आिे श नुस र / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Assistant Registrar, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.