AMJAD ANWAR SHAH BAZKER ,MUMBAI vs. DY. CIT CIRCLE 13(1)(1), MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1185/Mum/2026 (Assessment year: 2011-12)

Amjad Anwar Shah Bazker vs DCIT, Circle-13(1)(1), Mumbai 3rd Ground Floor Francesa, 14 Room No.218, AayakarBhavan, Chimbai Road, Bandra West, MaharshiKarve Marg, Mumbai- Mumbai-400050 400020 PAN:AAOPS4981N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Surendra Mohan (Sr. DR) Date of hearing : 22/04/2026 Date of pronouncement : 28/04/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (JM): The instant appeal of the assessee filed against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [for brevity the “Ld. CIT(A)”], order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2011-12, date of order 05.07.2023. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Ld. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 13(1)(2), Mumbai (for brevity the ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act date of order 04.12.2018.

2 ITA No.1185/Mum/2026 Amjad Anwar Shah Bazker 2. When the appeal was call for hearing none was present on behalf of the assessee and no condonation petition was filed for seeking the adjournment. Considering the merit of the case we proceed to dispose of the appeal exparte qua for assessee after hearing the Ld. DR. 3. The assessee filed the appeal with a delay of 856 days. The assessee filed a notarized affidavit duly executed on 27.02.2026 related to explanation for delay in filing appeal before the ITAT. The Ld. DR had placed his objection to the submissions of the assessee. Upon consideration, we are satisfied that there existed sufficient cause for the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 856 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is taken for adjudication. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a non filer of the return. The Ld. AO received the information through the AIR that the assessee had made the credit card transactions in Standard Charted Bank amount to Rs.5,65,346/-, cash deposit in same bank amount to Rs.46,50,000/-, mutual fund transaction amount to Rs.7,00,000/- and interest and salary duly reflected in form 26AS amount to Rs.26,68,903/- which comes total amount to Rs.85,84,249/-. The Ld. AO has considered the total transaction as escape assessment and accordingly notice u/sec. 148 was issued. Finally the impugned assessment order was passed exparte and the addition was confirmed the total transaction with bank, credit card and the income reflected in the 26AS amount to Rs.85,84,249/-. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) passed order exparte and confirmed the additions made by the Ld. AO. Being aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before us.

3 ITA No.1185/Mum/2026 Amjad Anwar Shah Bazker 5. We heard the Ld. DR’s submission and considered the documents available in the record. The Ld. DR argued and stands in favour of the orders of the revenue authorities. He invited our attention in impugned appellate order para 5 which is reproduced as below: “6. I have gone through the facts of the case, the statement of facts filed in Form No.35 and the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer. On perusal of the assessment order, it is seen that Information received through ITD system revealed that the appellant has not filed his return of income for A.Y.-2011-12, as per AIR of the appellant revealed credit card transaction in Standard Chartered Bank of Rs. 5,65,346/-, cash deposits of Rs.46,50,000/- in Standard Chartered Bank, mutual fund transaction of Rs.7,00,000/- and 26AS receipts in the nature of interest and salary of Rs.26,68,903 i.e a total transaction of Rs.85,84,249/- in F.Y-2010-11 relevant to AY-2011-12 Since the appellant has not filed the return of income for AY-2011-12 the case of the appellant was re-opened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y. 2011-12 During the assessment proceedings, it is observed by the assessing officer that on perusal of the details pertaining to credit card transaction in Standard Chartered Bank of Rs. 5,65,346/-, cash deposits of Rs. 46,50.000/- in Standard Chartered Bank, mutual fund transaction of Rs.7,00,000/- and 26AS receipts in the nature of interest and salary of Rs.26,68,903 ie a total transaction/receipt of Rs.85,84,249/- However, the appellant has failed to submit any explanation in respect of the above transaction/receipt to the tune of Rs. 85,84,249/-. In the absence of any submission/explanation or any return of income filed by the appellant for the A.Y. 2011-12 and to bring the said transaction/receipt within the purview of income escapement of A.Y. 2011-12, total transaction/receipt of Rs. 85,84,249/- was treated as unexplained money u/s. 69A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and was added back to the total income of the appellant by the assessing officer for the assessment year 2011-12. Sufficient and adequate opportunities were afforded to the appellant but, the appellant has not furnished any documentary evidence/information to prove his side.”

4 ITA No.1185/Mum/2026 Amjad Anwar Shah Bazker particularly relating to the additions require proper verification and adjudication on merits. In our considered view, the assessee has not been afforded an effective and meaningful opportunity of being heard before the Ld. CIT(A) as well as before the Ld. AO. The principles of natural justice mandate that a litigant should be granted a fair opportunity to present its case, especially when the matter involves factual verification. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned appellate order and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh on merits by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation in the appellate proceedings and refrain from seeking unnecessary adjournments. The Ld. CIT(A) shall adjudicate the issues strictly in accordance with law.

Order pronounced in the open court on 28th day of April 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai,िदनांक/Dated: 28/04/2026 SAUMYASr.PS Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अपीलाथ�/The Appellant ,

5 ITA No.1185/Mum/2026 Amjad Anwar Shah Bazker 2. �ितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. आयकरआयु� CIT 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., मुंबई/DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar), ITAT, MUMBAI