PADAMSINH PREMSINH REHVAR,HIMATNAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, HIMATNAGAR, HIMATNAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1045/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 August 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the interests of justice would be served by giving the assessee an opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer. The matter was restored to the AO for a fresh assessment on this issue.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 11,18,000/- made during the demonetization period. The assessee claims the CIT(A) did not properly appreciate the sources of these deposits, which included past withdrawals and agricultural income.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly appreciated the sources of unexplained cash deposits, and if the assessee should be granted an opportunity to prove the same before the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI R. GOVINDARAJAN

For Appellant: Shri Varis Isani, Advocate, Ms. Madhulika Satpute, Sr. D.R
For Respondent: Ms. Madhulika Satpute, Sr. D.R
Pronounced: 11/08/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R. GOVINDARAJAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1045/Ahd/2026 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2017-18)

बनाम Padamsinh Premsinh Income Tax Officer / Ward-1, Himatnagar Rehvar Vs. Mordungra Jambudi, Himatnagar, Gujarat-383001 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AEPPR4190F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ� ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Varis Isani, Advocate ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Ms. Madhulika Satpute, Sr. D.R. 03/08/2026 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 11/08/2026 (आदेश)/ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Jaipur, (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), dated 23.01.2026 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18.

ITA No.1045/Ahd/2026 [Padamsinh Premsinh Rehvar vs. ITO] A.Y. 2017-18 - 2 –

2.

The assessee in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.11,18,000/- made by the Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’) u/s 69A of the Act on account of unexplained cash deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee during demonetization period.

3.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee was not much conversant with the online Income Tax proceedings, hence, could not furnish requisite details for proving the source of the deposits before the AO, resulting into ex parte best judgment assessment order passed by the AO u/s 144 of the Act, making the impugned addition. Ld. Counsel has further submitted that, though, the requisite details were furnished before the Ld. CIT(A), however, the Ld. CIT(A) has not properly appreciated the same. He has submitted that out of the total deposits of Rs.11,18,000/-; Rs.7,00,000/- were deposited, out of immediate past withdrawals and further, the remaining amount of Rs.4,00,000/- and odd was deposited out of agriculture income of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to demonstrate the source of the deposits before the AO.

4.

Considering the above submissions, in our view, the interests of justice will be well served, if the assessee be given an opportunity to present his case before the AO, so that, he may properly demonstrate the source of the deposits in his bank

ITA No.1045/Ahd/2026 [Padamsinh Premsinh Rehvar vs. ITO] A.Y. 2017-18 - 3 –

accounts during demonetization period. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the AO for de novo assessment on this issue.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

This Order is pronounced on 11/08/2026

Sd/- Sd/- (R. GOVINDARAJAN) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 11/08/2026 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. 5. �वभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →