HARESHBHAI HIMMATBHAI THUMMAR,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 2(3)(2), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1079/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 July 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to make compliance, subject to payment of cost, and thereafter re-decide the appeal on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared income and later claimed to have taken a loan for property investment. The AO found cash deposits in loan creditors' accounts before the loan was disbursed, doubting the genuineness of the transactions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of unexplained money without providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH, SURAT

Before: SHRI TR SENTHIL KUMAR & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Sapnesh Sheth, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, SR-DR
Hearing: 20.05.2026Pronounced: 15.07.2026

PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -4, Surat [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 20.08.2025 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2015-16 in the proceeding u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred as “The Act”].

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assesse had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2015-16 on 30.03.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 4,65,400/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. The AO had noticed that the assessee had made large investment in property, the

ITA No.1079/Srt/2025 Hareshbhai Himmatbhai Thummar Vs. CIT(A), AY- 2015-16 2

source of which was required to be explained. According to the assessee, loan of Rs. 55,99,000/- was taken from six persons. On examination of bank account of the loan creditors, the AO found that cash deposits were made in their bank accounts before issue of loan to the assessee. Therefore, the AO was not satisfied with the genuineness and credit worthiness of the loan transactions. He, therefore, treated the cash deposits made in the account of the creditors, before issue of loan to the assessee, as unexplained money of the assessee and accordingly made an addition of Rs. 60,00,002/-. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 15.12.2017 at total income of Rs. 64,65,400/-.

3.

Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee had filed an appeal before the first appellate authority, which was decided by the learned CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. Th

4.

Now the assessee is in second appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal:

1.

On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(Appeals)-4, Surat has erred in passing ex parte order without providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(Appeals)-4, Surat has erred in confirming the action of assessing officer in making addition of Rs. 60,00,002/- on account of Unexplained money u/s. 69A of the IT Act. 3. It is therefore prayed that above addition made by assessing officer and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted. 4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.

ITA No.1079/Srt/2025 Hareshbhai Himmatbhai Thummar Vs. CIT(A), AY- 2015-16 3 5. Shri Sapnesh Sheth, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted at the outset that no compliance could be made by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and, therefore, he had dismissed the appeal of the assessee without adjudicating the grounds taken by the assessee on merits. He, therefore, requested that the assessee may be allowed another opportunity of being heard by setting aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A).

6.

Per Contra, Shri Ajay Uke, the Ld. SR-DR, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). However, he had no objection if the matter was set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee.

7.

We have considered the submissions of the assessee. It is found that the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed seven opportunities to the assessee but no compliance was made on any occasion. The assessee has not explained the reason for non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(A). When the appeal was filed by the assessee, he should have been careful enough to enquire about the status of the pending appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It was the duty of the assessee to watch his affairs before the CIT(A). The assessee was aware of the pending appeal, still no care was exercised to enquire about the status of appeal. We, therefore, direct the assessee to pay a cost of Rs.5,000/- which should be deposited to the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. Subject to payment of cost, the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to allow one more opportunity to the assessee to make compliance and thereafter re-decide the grounds taken by the assesse on merits. The assessee is also directed to respond to the queries of the

ITA No.1079/Srt/2025 Hareshbhai Himmatbhai Thummar Vs. CIT(A), AY- 2015-16 4

CIT(A) and furnish the documents and clarifications as required by him. In case the assessee does not make compliance in the course of set aside appeal proceeding, the Ld. CIT(A) will have liberty to pass the order on merits, on the basis of the materials available on record.

8.

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

Order pronounced in the Court on 15/07/2026 at Ahmedabad.

(TR SENTHIL KUMAR) (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated – 15th July, 2026 Neelesh, Sr. PS (True Copy) आदेश क� आदेश क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण / DR, ITAT, 6. गाड� फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) उप उप/सहायक उप उप सहायक सहायक पंजीकार सहायक पंजीकार पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →