KAMLESH PURANMAL AGRAWAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(2)(1), SURAT

ITA 1152/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 August 2026AY 2009-107 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee deposited large cash amounts into two bank accounts. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated these credits as unexplained investments and made an addition. The assessee argued that the income was offered on an estimation basis and provided re-casted financial statements.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the AO rejected the re-casted financial statements without proper opportunity for the assessee to rectify unsigned documents. Considering the estimation basis adopted by the assessee and the previous year's treatment, the Tribunal directed to sustain the addition to the extent of estimated profit at 12.65% of the bank credits.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO was justified in making an addition for unexplained bank credits when the assessee offered income on an estimation basis and provided re-casted financial statements? Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal when a similar issue in the subsequent year was partly allowed?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(2),Section 69,Section 44AF

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 22.06.2026Pronounced: 31.08.2026

PER : SUCHITRA KAMBLE, J M:

The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short “CIT(A)”] dated 29.09.2025 for the Assessment Year (in short “AY”) 2009-10. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in re-opening assessment u/s. 147 by issuing the notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in

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 147

All 48,773 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →