ABDUL FAKRUDDIN UDEPURWALA,UNITED ARAB EMIRATES vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 17(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

15.12.2025for Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17. The assessee has raised

following grounds of appeal:

“I. CONDONATION OF DELAY AND EX-PARTE ASSESSMENT: 1.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellant prays that the delay in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned and the appeal may kindly be decided on merits.

1.2. The Appellant is a Non-Resident and residing at Dubai, UAE since 1987. The Appellant never accessed his e-filing account and hence was not aware of proceedings under Section 147 of the Act as well as assessment proceedings under Section 143(3)/144 read with Section 147 of the Act. Accordingly, none of the notices issued by the Department from time to time were responded to.

Abdul FakruddinUderpurwala ITA No. 1264/M/2026 (AY: 2016-17)

1.3. The Appellant became aware of the assessment and the demand only in the month of April, 2024 when a Show Cause Notice for penalty was sought to be delivered at his address in Mumbai and which was collected by a neighbour who sent it back to him. Accordingly, it is submitted that the delay in filing the Appeal is neither deliberate nor intentional and hence the same may kindly be admitted and decided on merit.

1.4. It is submitted that the non-compliance with the notices issued from time to time has resulted in a high-pitched ex-parte assessment and has caused severe hardship to the Appellant as avoidable demand has been raised against the appellant for a sum of Rs. 71,38,930/-. The appellant prays that the delay in filing the appeal may kindly be condoned and the matter may kindly be decided on merits.

II. ADDITION FOR PURCHASE OF PROPERTY - RS. 74,97,000/- 2.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing Officer erred in making an addition for a sum of Rs. 74,97,000/- for the Purchases Property as "Unexplained Investment under Section 69 read with Section115BBE of the Act.

2.2. It is submitted that the Appellant is a Non-Resident since 1987 and is a resident of Dubai, UAE. The Appellant has remitted the money from time to time to the Builder/Developer directly from Dubai towards purchase of the property. Since the Appellant has sufficient documents to establish the source of investment, the addition made by learned Assessing Officer in ex-parte assessment is highly unjustified, unreasonable and unwarranted.

2.3. As explained above, since it is a case of ex-parte assessment, the Appellant did not have any occasion/opportunity to furnish the details and explanation in support of his case and this resulted in unwarranted addition for a sum of

Abdul FakruddinUderpurwala ITA No. 1264/M/2026 (AY: 2016-17) Rs.74,97,000/-. The appellant prays that the addition made on assessment may kindly be deleted as the same is unwarranted, unreasonable and unjustified.

III. INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES RS. 11,64,000/-: On the facts and in the circumstances of thecae and in law, the learned Assessing Officer erred in computing income under the head "Income from Other Sources" in respect of rent of Rs. 11,64,000/-.

It is submitted that the said income is chargeable to tax under the head "Income from House Property". Accordingly, the Appellant prays that the learned Assessing Officer may kindly be directed to bring to tax the said rent income under the head "Income from House Property" and also grant deduction therefrom in accordance with the law. The Appellant hereby reserves the right to add to, alter or amplify the above grounds appeal as and when the need arises for the same.”

ld. Authorised Representative (AR) of the assessee fairly submits that

assessment was completed ex-parte. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed

certain details which were not considered by ld. CIT(A). Thus, substantially

both the orders of lower authorities are not on merit. The ld. AR of the

assessee by explaining the fact submits that assessee is a Non-Resident Indian

(NRI) and left India in 1987 to UAE in search of employment. During the

relevant financial year, the assessee purchased residential flat at Thane. The

agreement value thereof was of Rs. 74,97,000/-. The assessee also purchased

a commercial shop at Panvel which was leased out on leave and license based

for an annual rent of Rs. 11,64,600/-. The transaction of purchase of flat

registration leave and license agreement was the basis of information to the 3

Abdul FakruddinUderpurwala ITA No. 1264/M/2026 (AY: 2016-17) office of assessing officer (AO) which resulted in reopening. During

assessment, the assessee was not aware about the assessment proceeding.

The AO treated the entire sale consideration of Rs.74,97,000/- as unexplained

and taxed under section 115BBE. Similarly, on the basis of entry in Form 26AS,

about rental receipt of Rs. 11,64,600/-, it was treated as income from ‘other

source’s. The assessee came to know about passing of assessment order only

in April, 2024 when show cause notice for levy of penalty was served, which

was collected by neighbour and forwarded to assessee. The assessee

accordingly filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) with prayer for condonation of delay.

Though, the ld. CIT(A) condoned the delay but both the additions were upheld.

Before ld CIT(A), the assessee filed various details to substantiate his

investment and rental income. However, the ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate such

evidences, which include the ledger account of assessee with builder and

developer and NRO account of assessee with ICICI Bank reflecting all

payments to builder and payments summary for purchase of flat. All such

evidences are again filed before the bench. However, fact remains the same

that such evidences are not verified by lower authorities. The ld. AR of the

assessee submits that matter may be restored back to the file of AO to

consider all such evidences and to pass the assessment order afresh.

the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. Sr. DR for the

revenue submits that despite allowing sufficient opportunity to the assessee

Abdul FakruddinUderpurwala ITA No. 1264/M/2026 (AY: 2016-17) has not made any compliance before lower authorities. In case the benches of

the view that assessee deserve any further opportunity matter may be restored

to ld. CIT(A) with the direction to assessee to make timely compliance.

through the orders of lower authorities. On perusal of assessment order as well

as ld. CIT(A), we find that the lower authorities have passed order for the want

of necessary evidence about investment in flat as well as about ownership of

property against which the assessee has shown rental income wherein TDS

under section 194I was deducted. Considering the fact that assessee has

placed sufficient evidence in the form of NRO account, details of investment

with builder as well as leave and license agreement and detail of copy of Form

26AS. In our view, all these evidences are material for determination real

controversy of issues before us. Considering the fact that all these evidences

are not considered by lower authorities, therefore, we deem it appropriate to

restore the matter to the file of jurisdictional assessing officer (JAO) to consider

all such evidences and pass the order in accordance with law. The matter is

restored to JAO to avoid the circumstances that in the event of considering the

evidences the ld CIT(A) mar require remand report form AO. Thus, to avoid

such eventuality, the matter is sent to JAO. Needless to direct that before

passing the order, the AO shall allow fair and reasonable opportunity to the

assessee. The assessee is also directed to be more vigilant in future and not to

raise lame excuse for compliance before AO.

Abdul FakruddinUderpurwala ITA No. 1264/M/2026 (AY: 2016-17) 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order was pronounced in the open Court on 07/05/2026.

/- S/- S Sd/- Sd/- GIRISH AGRAWAL PAWAN SINGH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 07/05/2026 Biswajit Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Nagpur; and (5) Guard file.

By Order

Assistant Registrar / DDO ITAT, Mumbai