BHOOMI DEVELOPERS ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS,BELGAUM vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 73/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji28 July 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with an opportunity to present additional evidence. The CIT(A) was directed to call for a remand report from the Assessing Officer and adjudicate the matter afresh.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns an addition of Rs. 1,05,12,402/- for unexplained money. The assessee failed to comply with notices before the CIT(A), leading to confirmation of the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be allowed to submit additional evidence before the CIT(A) to explain the source of cash deposits, and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 69A,Section 148,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, ‘DB’ PANAJI

Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE

For Appellant: Shri Omkar Godbole (virtual)
For Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal (virtual)
Hearing: 11.06.2026Pronounced: 28.07.2026

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2015-16 is directed against the order dated 07.03.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 14.02.2024 passed u/s.147 r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

The sole grievance of the assessee revolves around the addition of Rs.1,05,12,402/- for the unexplained money u/s.69A of the Act.

3.

At the outset, ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly admitted that assessee failed to make proper compliance before ld.CIT(A).

2 Bhoomi Developers Engineers and Contractors He further referring to the paper book running into 215 pages requested for admitting various additional evidences placed at pages 10 to 205 of the paper book which includes bank statement, confirmations, consent letters and registered sale deeds could not be filed before the lower authorities and they goes to the root of the matter and essential for adjudication of the issue. Further, ld. Counsel raised no objection if the matter is restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and a remand report is called for from the ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer.

4.

On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A).

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. We observe that the assessee is a partnership firm and based on the information about cash deposit of Rs.105,12,000/- reassessment proceedings were carried out by issuance of notice u/s.148 of the Act to which return of income was filed declaring Nil income. Thereafter, during the course of assessment proceedings, assessee filed written submissions as a result of which ld. Assessing Officer concluded the assessment making addition for unexplained money at Rs.1,05,12,402/- u/s.69A of the Act.

6.

Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but then failed to respond to the notices issued on 21.10.2024, 16.12.2024, 24.01.2025 which left no option for the ld.CIT(A) to conclude the appellate proceedings confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

7.

Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee has made reference to the paper book containing various details including the bank

3 Bhoomi Developers Engineers and Contractors statement, confirmation letters and registered sale deed etc. On the strength of these details, it is claimed that assessee can explain the source of cash deposit if an opportunity is provided.

8.

Considering the prayer made by ld. Counsel for the assessee and in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) giving one more opportunity to the assessee. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee. Ld.CIT(A) shall call for a remand report from the ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and after obtaining the objections from the assessee shall adjudicate the issues in accordance with law as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

9.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on this 28th day of July, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji/Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 28th July, 2026. Satish

4 Bhoomi Developers Engineers and Contractors Satish Kumar Madishetty Date: 2026.07.29 10:09:14 +05'30'

आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

2.3.

The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, Panaji 4. ‘DB’ Bench / DR, ITAT, Panaji ‘DB’ Bench ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,

////

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →