VIJAY SHARAD BADHAN,THANE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3, THANE, THANE

आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण�ायपीठमुंबईम�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM I.T.A. No.1770/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Vijay Sharad Badhan Dy. Commissioner of Income tax, A1, 202 Chhabhaiyas Vihang Circle 3, Thane Garden, Opp. Raymond Vs. Ashar IT Park, Wagle Industrial Estate, Company Jkgram, Thane(West)- Thane (West)-400604 400606 PAN: AEOPB8304C Assessee- अपीलाथ� / Appellant Revenue-��थ�/ Respondent :

Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Athavale : Shri Vinod Badoni, Sr. DR Revenue by : 22.06.2026 Date of Hearing : 08.09.2026 Date of Pronouncement

O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM: This appeal is preferred by the assessee, directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals, National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short, “the Ld. CIT(A)”], dated 13.02.2026 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24, arises from the assessment order under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”] dated 27.03.2025, passed by Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department [in short, “the Ld.AO”].

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of INR 5,07,23,709 made by the Assessing Officer (AO) under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The learned CIT(A) erred in observing that the appellant has not conclusively established how all the transactions fall squarely within the exclusion contemplated by the CBDT Circular no. 13 of 2021 or that the conditions of the first proviso to Section. 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 201 have been fully satisfied, inspite of giving all the documents by the appellant during the appeal hearings. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of INR 1,16,80,803 made by the AO under Section 68 of the Act in respect of loan taken as unexplained credit. 3. The learned CIT(A) erred in not directing the AO to delete the ad-hoc disallowance amounting to INR 12,38,400 being 10% of expenses of INR 1,23,84,003 incurred by the appellant on account of labour charges, wages paid, repair and maintenance changes, and salary and wages. 4. The learned CIT(A) erred in not directing the AO to delete the net income of INR 35,783 received on trading in mangoes as business income. He erred in not appreciating that the appellant has already offered to tax the said income under the head "Income from other sources", which amounts to double addition of the same income. 5. Each one of the above grounds of appeal is without prejudice to the above. 6. The appellant reserves the right to add, alter or amend to the above grounds of appeal.

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan Rs.35,783/- and thereby determined the assessable income of assessee at Rs.7,62,18,620/-.

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan This with reference to the appeal fixed for hearing before your honour on 22 June 2026. In this connection, under the instruction of my client, the appellant abovenamed, I would like to file certain additional evidence with respect to Ground Nos. 1 and 2 of the appeal. Ground No. 1 The Assessing officer disallowed certain expenses u/s. 40(a)(ia) on the ground that the appellant did not deduct tax at source while making the payments in respect of such expenses. In this connection, the appellant is filing documents as mentioned at page 559 to 561 of the Paperbook-11 as an additional evidence. These documents represent summary of TCS and TDS made from various parties. Further, at the time of assessment proceedings the appellant could not submit Form 26A [as per Second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) r.w. first proviso to Section 201(1) of the Income tax Act] from various parties, which are now available and enclosed at page nos. 169-173, 177- 178, 185-189,190-198, 299-236,237-244,250-260 and 264-269 of the Paerbook -I. Further, the appellant would like to submit a summary of TDS statement from TRACES wherein the status of challans has been given in respect of TDS made and paid to the Government but not consumed. This statement will find at page 562 of Papewrbok-II, which was not submitted before the Assessing officer. Moreover, the learned Assessing officer disallowed the purchase of goods from various parties inspite on TCS collected by Seller from the Appellant. Summary of party-wise disallowances and evidences submitted by the Appellant are given at page 559 to 561, 562, 554-558 of the Paperbook-II. The above documents could not be submitted due to paucity of time at the time of assessment. As the above details are now available with the Appellant and the same are going to the roots of the matter, I request your honour to admit the same as fresh evidences. Ground No. 2 The Assessing officer made addition under Section 68 in respect of loans taken from various parties. In this connection, the appellant would like to point out that these are not fresh loans taken by the appellant from these parties during the year. Certain loans were given to these parties by the appellant in earlier years and the same were repaid by these parties to the appellant during the year. Further, loans taken from one party (Shree Swami Samartha Agencies) has been repaid by the appellant in subsequent years. Therefore, the question of making addition under Section 68 for these parties would not arise. In order to demonstrate the above factual position, the appellant has filed documents mentioned at page 331-339 of the Paperbook-I and page 568 to 578 of the Paperbook-II. These documents could not be furnished to the assessing officer due to paucity of time. As the above details are now available with the Appellant and the same are going to the roots of the matter, I request your honour to admit the same as fresh evidences. As the above documents require verification by the Assessing Officer, Ground no. 1 and 2 can be set aside to the file of the Assessing officer for verification and then allow.

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan

I am also submitting Ground Wise Tabulation and Arguments of the Appellant.

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan 8. We have considered the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and case laws relied upon by the assessee. Admittedly in the present case, the assessee is admitting that certain documents could not be produced before the authorities below, by furnishing all such documents the assessee would be required to comply with the provisions of law. The additional evidences are in the form of summary of TCS and TDS made from various parties, copy of Form 26A as per second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) read with first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act. Regarding additions/disallowances u/s 68 and 37, the assessee relied upon certain documents which are placed in assessee’s paper book at page no.338-339 and 568-578 and it is submitted that due to paucity of time, such documents could not be furnished before the Ld. AO.

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan facts have been furnished by the assessee before us, which, having regard to their nature and relevance to the issues under consideration, require appropriate verification and examination at the level of the Assessing Officer. Since such material was not available before the Assessing Officer at the stage of original assessment, the same would necessarily require factual verification and consideration in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

ITA No. 1770/Mum/2026 Vijay Sharad Badhan details and evidences within the time allowed by the Ld. AO. The proceedings shall thus be undertaken afresh uninfluenced by any observations contained herein on the merits of the issues, as no finding on the substantive claims of the assessee is being recorded by us at this stage.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08-09-2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (ARUN KHODPIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 08-09-2026. Ankit K., Sr. PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4. Guard File 5. CIT

BY ORDER,

(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai