DAULATRAM GOVINDRAM VASWANI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the issue to the AO to consider the case afresh after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.
What were the facts?
The assessee deposited a cash amount of Rs. 13,59,378/- in his bank account, which was treated as unexplained income. The assessee failed to comply with notices from the AO and did not appear before the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the unexplained cash deposit is taxable and whether the assessee is entitled to a fresh opportunity to present his case before the AO.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 144,Section 147,Section 69,Section 271(1)(b),Section 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI AMARJIT SINGH&
PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 28.01.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-7, Ahmedabad arising out of the order dated 27.09.2017 passed by the ITO, Ward-7(2)(1), Ahmedabad under Section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to “the Act”) for A.Y. 2010- 11.
We have heard the Ld. DR. None appeared on behalf of the assessee we have also perused the relevant materials available on record.
It appears that before the Ld. AO the assessee has not complied in spite of being served with number of notices. A show cause notice was issued on 09.08.2017 for levy penalty under Section 271(1)(b) of the Act. Fact of the issue is this that the assessee has deposited cash amount of Rs. 13,59,378/- in his bank account which was - 2 - Daulatram Govindram Vaswani vs. ITO A.Y. 2010-11 treated as unexplained income of the assessee under Section 69 of the Act which was, in turn, confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). Penalty proceeding under Section 271(1)(c) was, therefore, initiated separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or concealing particulars of income.
When the matter was taken up by us none appeared on behalf of the assessee, neither any adjournment was sought for. However, taking into consideration the entirety of the fact and the orders passed by the authorities below under Section 144 of the Act we find that the assessee needs to be given a further opportunity of being heard to represent his case and, hence, we set aside the issue to the file of the Ld. AO to consider the same afresh upon giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and upon considering the evidence which the assessee may choose to file at the time of hearing of the matter. Assessee’s appeal is, thus, allowed for statistical purpose.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 29/10/2021
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026