BHARATBHUSHAN KISHANLAL GUPTA,GANDHIDHAM vs. ACIT CIRCLE GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 201/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 July 2026AY 2023-244 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex parte without effective representation. In the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in shipping services, declared income of Rs. 75,63,480/-. The Assessing Officer made additions of Rs. 1,99,54,148/- on account of unexplained cash credit and Rs. 91,771/- for suppressed export sales.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee had provided sufficient evidence to substantiate unsecured loans and reconcile export sales discrepancies. Whether the appeal before the CIT(A) was decided fairly.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3),Section 142(1),Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot

Before: Dr. BRR Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Doshi, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 28/07/2026Pronounced: 31/07/2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट। In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot

Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member

आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 201/RJT/2026 [ �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2023-24 ] Bharatbhushan Kishanlal Gupta ACIT, Circle, Office No. 111, Golden Point AO No 91, Range code 202, Vs. Building, Near Fun & Food Restaurant, Gandhidham. Plot No.31, Sector 8 Gandhidham, Income-tax Office, Plot No. 32, Nr. Kutch– 370201 IFCCO Colony, Gandhidham-370201 Gujarat Gujarat, �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFCPG3849N (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri R. K. Doshi, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR

Date of Hearing : 28/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 31/07/2026

:: ORDER :: Per, Shri Sonjoy Sarma, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as ‘NFAC’], dated 30.12.2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by assessing officer u/s. 143(3) of the Act, dated 15.03.2025.

ITA No. 201/RJT/2026 Bharatbhai K. Gupta 02. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of shipping and allied maritime services. The assessee filed the return of income for the Assessment Year 2023-24 declaring a total income of Rs.75,63,480/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS on account of various risk parameters, including high income without disclosure in Schedule of Assets, high liabilities and creditors, low business income, and mismatch between the export turnover declared in the return of income and the FOB value of exports as per the Export-Import (EXIM) data. During the course of the assessment proceedings, notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Income-tax Act were issued to the assessee. The assessee was called upon to furnish details relating to the unsecured loans reflected in the balance sheet, including the identity and creditworthiness of the lenders, genuineness of the loan transactions, confirmations from the creditors, details of expenses, and reconciliation between the export sales declared in the return of income and the FOB value of exports as reflected in the EXIM data. Although the assessee furnished certain details and documents from time to time, the replies were found to be incomplete. In particular, the assessee failed to substantiate the identity and creditworthiness of the lenders and the genuineness of the unsecured loan transactions. Despite being afforded repeated opportunities, the assessee also failed to furnish any satisfactory reconciliation explaining the discrepancy between the export sales declared in the return of income and the higher FOB value of exports reflected in the EXIM data. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act by making an addition of Rs.1,99,54,148/- under section 68 on account of unexplained cash credit. The Assessing Officer further made an addition of Rs.91,771/- towards income arising from alleged supressed

Page 2 of 4

ITA No. 201/RJT/2026 Bharatbhai K. Gupta export sales by applying the gross profit rate declared by the assessee. Consequently, the total income of the assessee was assessed at Rs.2,76,09,399/-

3.

Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Notices were issued by the Ld. CIT(A), however, the assessee sought adjournments and, even after the expiry of the time granted, failed to file any written submissions or supporting evidence. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) decided the appeal ex parte on the basis of the material available on record.

4.

Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and the matter restored to his file for fresh adjudication after granting the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.

5.

The Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below.

6.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that although the assessee did not properly prosecute the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the appeal came to be decided ex parte without effective representation. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the issues afresh on merits after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation in the appellate proceedings and to furnish all supporting documents and evidence necessary to substantiate the claims made before the authorities.

Page 3 of 4

ITA No. 201/RJT/2026 Bharatbhai K. Gupta

7.

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 31st day of July, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ Dr. BRR Kumar] [ Shri Sonjoy Sarma ] Vice President Judicial Member राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date:31/07/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By order //True Copy// Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Rajkot

Page 4 of 4

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →