MOHAMED RAFI MAHAJABEEN,VELLORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2, VELLORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee was able to provide certified bank statements for all accounts, showing total credits of Rs. 72,75,131/-, not Rs. 1.49 crores as alleged by the AO. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the assessment to the AO for de novo assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee did not file an income tax return for AY 2013-14. The AO reopened the assessment based on information of a large cash deposit of Rs. 1,49,54,639/- in the assessee's bank account. The AO made an addition of this amount as unexplained income.
What were the issues?
Whether the addition of Rs. 1,49,54,639/- as unexplained cash deposit was justified, and whether the assessee had discharged the burden of proof regarding the source of funds.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL
आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT(A)’), Delhi, dated 17.06.2026 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY’) 2013-14 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Brief facts are that assessee is an individual who didn’t file his return of income (ITR/RoI) for AY 2013-14. The AO received information, from the insight portal “HIGH RISK – CRIU/VRU INFORMATION” that the
ITA No. 3626/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen :: 2 :: assessee has entered into the significant financial transactions during the relevant AY [i.e. huge cash deposit of Rs.1,49,54,639/- was available in the saving bank account of assessee with IDBI Bank]. Hence, the AO recorded the reasons for re-opening the assessment by noting that there was escapement of income to the tune of Rs.1,49,54,639/- and hence, issued notice u/s.148 of the Act on 31.03.2021. Pursuant to the notice u/s.148 of the Act, assessee filed return on 19.04.2021 declaring income of Rs.6,74,220/-. The AO directed the assessee to file details of the bank account held during the Financial Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘the FY’) 2012-13, as well as the legible copy of the bank statements of bank accounts during that period as well as explain each and every debit and credit entries in the bank statements along with documentary evidence. Further, he directed the assessee to file the details of the cash deposit during the FY as well as explain the source of cash deposited along with documentary evidence and file cash book/bank book with detailed narration. Pursuant thereto the assessee filed balance sheet, profit and loss account along with respective schedules and notes thereto and details regarding the business. The AO noted from perusal of the profit and loss account that the assessee has shown total direct income/receipt to the tune of Rs.67,29,400/- and that the assessee has declared only about bank account maintained with Vijaya Bank (presently Bank of Baroda). According to the AO, assessee had more than 1 bank account
ITA No. 3626/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen :: 3 :: and hence, he directed the assessee to file the details of all bank accounts held during the FY 2012-13 including the account held with IDBI Bank. The AO notes that the assessee filed statement of IDBI Bank and Vijaya Bank. According to the AO, assessee didn’t disclose the bank account maintained with SBI. So, the AO gave further show cause notice to the assessee and directed him to file all details of cash deposits, etc., but according to the AO, the assessee didn’t file any reply. Hence, he was of the view that assessee having already declared total receipt of Rs.67,29,400/-(refer P&L account), whereas information he received was that assessee has deposited cash of Rs.1,49,54,639/-, which he presumed to be from unaccounted source. According to AO, since the assessee has not discharged the burden of proof to explain the nature and source of cash of Rs.1,49,54,639/-, which he has deposited in his bank account during FY 2013-13 relevant to AY 2013-14, he drew adverse inference against the assessee and added it u/s.69A of the Act by passing the assessment order on 29.03.2022.
Aggrieved the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who noted that the assessee didn’t respond to his three (3) notices issued on various dates, hence, he was of the view that he had no other alternative but to dismiss the appeal of the assessee ex parte qua the assessee.
ITA No. 3626/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen :: 4 :: 4. Aggrieved the assessee is before us. Heard both the parties. The main plea of the assessee is that there was no cash deposit of Rs.1,49,54,639/- in his three (3) bank accounts maintained with IDBI, SBI, Vijaya Bank (Bank of Baroda). According to the assessee based on wrong assumption of fact the AO first of all has erroneously reopened the assessment. In order to support, his assertion that there were no cash deposits amounting to Rs.1,49,54,639/- in his bank-accounts, assessee has filed an affidavit, contents of the same is reproduced as under :-
AFFIDAVIT 1, Mrs. Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen, daughter of Rahamatullah Khan, aged about 63 years, residing at 140A1, MBD Road East, Ranipet H.O., Vellore-632401, Tamil Nadu, holding PAN AOEPM7844N, do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows: 1. I am the Appellant in the above appeal and am well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case. I am competent to swear this affidavit. 2. The assessment for Assessment Year 2013-14 was completed under Section 147 read with PUBLI made on the allegation of unexplained credits in my bank accounts. Section 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, wherein an addition of Rs.1,49,54,639/- was made on the allegation of unexplained credits in my bank accounts. 3. Against the said assessment order, 1 preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which came to be disposed of under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Being aggrieved by the said order, I have preferred the present appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal. 4. During the hearing of the present appeal, this Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to observe that confirmation from the respective banks on a Customer Identification Number (CIF) basis would assist in establishing the complete particulars of the bank accounts maintained by me during the relevant previous year.
Pursuant to the said observation, I approached the concerned banks and obtained certificates after verification of their records. The said certificates have been issued by:
ITA No. 3626/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen :: 5 :: ●) IDBI Bank; ●) State Bank of India; and ●) Vijaya Bank (now Bank of Baroda) 6. The said certificates confirm the particulars of all bank accounts maintained by me under the respective Customer Identification Numbers (CIFs)/Customer IDs during the Financial Year 2012-13 relevant to Assessment Year 2013-14. 7. The bank accounts maintained by me during the said financial year are as under: Sr. Bank CIF/ Account No. Nature of No. Customer ID Account 1 IDBI Bank 76249828 1012104000006637 Savings 2 Vijaya Bank XCFV00734 42680200001318 Current
(presently Bank XCFV00920 42680100015149 Savings of Baroda) 3 State Bank of 85036982618 30063779158 Savings India 8. The total credits and debits reflected in the above bank accounts during the Financial Year 2012-13, as certified by the respective banks, are summarized below: Sr Name of Account No. Total Credits Total Debits Source of . Bank Confirma No tion (₹) (₹) . 1 IDBI Bank 1012104000006 90,794.00 30,000.00 Annexure 637 A 2 Vijaya 4268020000131 49,26,867.0 49,69,889. Annexure Bank 8 0 00 B (presently 4268010001514 18,51,149.0 17,29,261. Annexure Bank of 9 9 00 C Baroda) 3 State 30063779158 4,26,321.00 2,40,968.0 Annexure Bank of 0 D India 72,95,131.09 9. I further state that, out of the total credits reflected in the above bank accounts during the Financial Year 2012-13, a sum of Rs. 67,29,400/- represents business receipts pertaining to my business activities. The said receipts have been duly accounted for in the books of account and
ITA No. 3626/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen :: 6 :: disclosed as business income in the Profit and Loss Account forming part of the return of income filed for the relevant Assessment Year. The balance credits comprise personal transactions such as transfers between own accounts, receipts from family members, loan receipts, withdrawals redeposited, and other non-income transactions, and therefore do not constitute undisclosed income. 10. I respectfully state that the above summary has been prepared from the certificates issued by the respective banks after verification of their records on a Customer Identification Number (CIF)/Customer ID and PAN basis. The figures stated above faithfully represent the aggregate credits and debits pertaining to all bank accounts maintained by me with the aforesaid banks during the Financial Year 2012-13. 11. I solemnly affirm that the above constitute all the bank accounts maintained by me with the aforesaid banks during the Financial Year 2012- 13, and I did not maintain any other bank account with IDBI Bank, State Bank of India or Vijaya Bank (now Bank of Baroda) during the said period other than those stated above. 12. I further state that the certificates issued by the respective banks have been obtained after verification of their records on a CIF/Customer ID and PAN basis and truly reflect my banking relationship with the respective banks during the relevant financial year. 13. I respectfully submit that this affidavit is being filed pursuant to the observation of this Hon'ble Tribunal and in support of the bank certificates already placed on record. 14. The statements made above are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief, and nothing material has been concealed therefrom. 5. A perusal of the above reveals that assessee was maintaining account in three (3) banks [IDBI, SBI, Vijaya Bank (Bank of Baroda)], the assessee asserts through certified bank statement that total credits is only of an amount of Rs.72,75,131/- and not as alleged by the AO of Rs.1,49,54,639/-. According to the assessee notice u/s.148 was issued on 31.03.2021 which was in the midst of COVID-19 and therefore, assessee could not get the bank statement of the SBI for the FY.2012-13 which resulted in the AO drawing adverse inference against the assessee. Be that as it may, we find that the assessee didn’t produce the bank statement which he was maintaining with State Bank of India which led
ITA No. 3626/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen :: 7 :: the AO to believe that the assessee has suppressed some information regarding the purported cash deposits of Rs.1.49 crores and therefore he has made the addition. Since the assessee is able to get the certified copy of the bank statements maintained with the SBI also, the assessee is now in a position to bring all the relevant material before the AO to show the amounts credited in his bank account during the relevant period, which according to him is only Rs.72,75,131/- and not Rs.1.49 crores. Hence, for the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the assessment back to the file of AO for de novo assessment. The assessee to bring all relevant evidence before the AO and thereafter, the AO to conduct necessary enquiries and assess the income of the assessee in accordance to law after hearing the assessee.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 20th day of August, 2026, in Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/- (गगन गोयल) (एबी टी. वक�) (GAGAN GOYAL) (ABY T. VARKEY) लेखा सद�य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, �दनांक/Dated: 20th August, 2026. YS
Digitally signed YASHVI by YASHVIR SINGH R SINGH Date: 2026.09.03 16:06:56 -07'00'
ITA No. 3626/Chny/2026 (AY 2013-14) Mohamed Rafi Mahajabeen :: 8 :: आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF
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 →- M/S Manorama Nayak, Khorda vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar Iv Circle, KhurdaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Chandan Kumar Bathual vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Cuttack-Iii Range, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Manoranjan Sadangi vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, Gopalpur Range, GanjamOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Bijaya Kumar Parekh vs. State Tax Officer, CT And GST Balangir Circle, BalangirOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Puspanjali Bhuyan vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026