YADUVANSHI AHIR GWAL SAKAL PANCH,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 20(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6704/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20)

Yaduvanshi Ahir Gwal Sakal Vs. ITO Ward 20(3)(1), Panch Mumbai Krishna Chaya Bldg, Piramal Chamber, Ground Floor, 98 Aaimai Curry Road, Mervanji Street, Parel, Mumbai - 400012 Mumbai -400012 PAN/GIR No. AAATY4009M (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue by Shri V. Vinod Kumar SR DR Date of Hearing 26.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 29.04.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 22.08.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2019-20. The following grounds are reproduced below: “1. The Ld. A.O erred in considering the investment made amounting to Rs.20,00,000/- by the Appellant as unexplained investment and proposing addition of the

2 ITA No. 6704/Mum/2025

same u/s 69 of 1. T. Act, 1961 merely on the basis of non- filing of income tax return without appreciating the facts and circumstances. Hence proposing addition of unexplained investment us 69A of 1.1. Act, 1961 is unjustified. 2. The L.d. A.O erred in considering the interest income earned of Rs.6,45,573/- from the investment made in earlier year and rental income of Rs.11,40,000/- carned from the renting of the premise in the name of the Trust as undisclosed income since the Appellant was in genuine hardship and was not able to file income tax return because of non-availability of 12A registration certificate. Hence proposing addition of unexplained income u/s 147 of 1.T. Act, 1961 is unjustified. 3. (i). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings under Section 270A, 271AAC(1) and 272A(1)(d) of the Act. The Appellant prays that the penalty proceedings may please be dropped. (ii) The Appellant submits that the above grounds are independent and without prejudice to one another. (iii) The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw all or any of the grounds of appeal herein above and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered neeessary either at or before the hearing of this appeal as per the law." 4. In the facts of the case and in Law, the learned CTT(A) erred in confirming the additions by rejecting all the grounds of appeal even though the Appellant had sought time to file additional documents u/r 46A against the assessment order passed u/s 144 r w s 147 by the AO. 5. In the facts of the case and in Law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the additions without granting personal hearing through VC. ” 2. At the very outset we noticed that assessee was ex-parte before Ld. CIT(A) and consequently, considering the documents

3 ITA No. 6704/Mum/2025

placed on record, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.

4 ITA No. 6704/Mum/2025

shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.

Order pronounced in the open court on 29.04.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 29/04/2026 RY, Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. धिभागीय प्रधतधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,मुम्बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy//

उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai