GAJALA BANO MOHAMMAD RASHID SHAIKH,CHEMBUR, MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 27(1)(5), VASHI, MUMBAI

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 07.01.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2019-20. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “Ground No. 1-Addition u/s. 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961("the Act") amounting to Rs. 26,96,000/- 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in upholding the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in making addition u/s.69 of the Act amounting to Rs. 26,96,000/- 1.2 The Appellant prays that the addition made by the Ld. Assessing Officer may kindly be deleted. Ground No. 2: General Ground The Appellant craves leave to add, delete amend or modify the above grounds of appeal.”

Gajala Bano Mohammad Rashid Shaikh ITA No. 2633/Mum/2026 (AY: 2019-20) 2. Vide application dated 16.07.2026, the assessee has raised following additional ground of appeal: “9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the proceedings under section 148A of the Act and the notice under section 148 of the Act dated 28.03.2023 having been issued by the jurisdictional AO in violation of the provisions of section 151A of the Act read with the scheme formulated therein are without jurisdiction, bad in law, and liable to be quashed. 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO grossly erred in resorting to section 148A(b) to conduct an enquiry, thereby circumventing the requirement of obtaining prior approval from the specified authority as statutorily mandated under section 148A(a) of the Act, consequently rendering the notice under section 148A(b) dated 16.02.2023 and the consequent proceedings to be without jurisdiction, bad in law and liable to be quashed. 11. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO erred in passing the order under section 148A(d) of the Act and issuing the notice under section 148 of the Act in absence of a valid approval under section 151 of the Act. 12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO & CIT (A)/NFAC has grossly erred in making an addition under section 69 of the Act without appreciating that the said provision has no applicability in the facts of the present case.” 3. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that AO as well as ld. CIT(A) has not decided the case on merit. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed certain details with written submission. However, such details were not considered by ld. CIT(A). The assessee has also raised additional ground of appeal about the validity of the reopening under section 147 and issuance of notice under section 148. On our specific question as to why the assessee has not furnished all such details before AO and no such objection as has been raised in the additional grounds of appeal against the

Gajala Bano Mohammad Rashid Shaikh ITA No. 2633/Mum/2026 (AY: 2019-20) validity of reopening before lower authorities. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that matter may be restored back to the file of AO with the liberty to assessee to raise all such objections and to file source of cash deposit during relevant financial year. 4. On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue not opposed the plea of ld. AR of the assessee in restoring the matter back to the file of AO. 5. We have considered the contentions and considering the fact that assessee has not furnished source of cash deposit in bank account either before AO or before ld. CIT(A). Therefore, the matter is restored back to the file of AO to pass assessment order afresh. The assessee is also given liberty to raise all factual and legal objections before AO, as per law. Needless to direct that before passing the order afresh, the AO shall allow fair and reasonable opportunity to assessee before passing the order. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order was pronounced in the open Court on 23/07/2026. /- S/- Sd/- /- Sd/- Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 23/07/2026 Biswajit

Gajala Bano Mohammad Rashid Shaikh ITA No. 2633/Mum/2026 (AY: 2019-20) Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file.

By Order

Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai