IBRAHIM BAIG MOHAMMAD,AKIVIDU vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJAHMUNDRY, RAJAHMUNDRY

ITA 652/VIZ/2026Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 August 2026AY 2021-226 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issue to the AO for fresh adjudication, subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 5,000/-.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed ownership of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- cash seized by police, stating it was accumulated business income. However, no supporting documents were provided to the authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the addition of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- as unexplained money was justified without proper substantiation by the assessee, and if an opportunity for further verification should be granted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 115BBE

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Pronounced: 31.08.2026

PER MANJUNATHA G., ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

This appeal is filed by the Assesseeagainst the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-3 [“Ld.CIT(Appeals)”],

1 Ibrahim Baig Mohammad Visakhapatnam vide DIN: ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1088036008(1) dated 28.03.2026 for the Assessment Year 2021-22, arising out of assessment order passed by the AO u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“t

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →