GAJANAND JAGDISHPRASAD AGRAWAL,TAPI vs. ITO, WARD-2, BARDOLI

ITA 1039/SRT/2024Status: DisposedITAT Surat18 September 2026AY 2017-189 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee to present voluminous additional evidence. A cost of Rs. 5,000 was imposed on the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed a return of income, and the AO made additions on account of unexplained cash sales during demonetization and disallowed certain expenses. The CIT(A) upheld these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be allowed to present additional evidence before the AO for fresh adjudication, and if so, under what conditions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI B.M. BIYANI

For Appellant: Shri Shaunak Zaveri, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 22.06.2026Pronounced: 18.09.2026

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by the order of first-appeal dated 09.08.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of the assessment-order dated 27.12.2019 passed by learned ITO, Ward-2, Badroli [“Ld. AO”] u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, Gajanand Jagdishprasad Agrawal

1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2017-18, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

2.

The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee-individual filed

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →