ABDULVAHAD ABDULRAHIM MATADAR,DAHOD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, DAHOD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1443/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 June 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's non-compliance but, in the interest of justice, remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment to allow the assessee to submit all relevant documents.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to provide details and explanations regarding unexplained cash deposits before the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), despite multiple opportunities. The CIT(A) upheld the addition made by the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition without providing proper opportunity, and whether the matter should be remanded for de novo assessment due to the assessee's non-compliance.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.06.2026Pronounced: 22.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1443/Ahd/2026 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Abdulvahad Abdulrahim Income Tax Officer, Vs. Matadar, Ward-1, Gita Mandir, Dahod. Jhalod, Dahod-389170.

[PAN :BKRPM6801 K] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul K Patel, Advocate Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 22.06.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1.

The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in passing the order on 31.07.2024 without giving proper opportunity to your appellant.

ITA No. 1443/Ahd/2026 Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in disregarding the Grounds of Appeal filed by the appellant on 25.04.2022. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition / disallowance of 50% of expenses of Rs.1,71,67,091/- made by the Learned Assessing Officer. 4. The appellant craves the right to add to or alter, amend, substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of appeal.

3.

On perusal of the records, it is observed that the assessee was afforded several opportunities of hearing on 16.09.2025, 03.04.2023, and 24.07.2024 to furnish details, clarifications and explanations to substantiate the source of unexplained cash deposits under section 69 of the Act. However, despite being granted multiple opportunities, the assessee remained non-compliant and failed to furnish the requisite details or explanations before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), based on the material available on record, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. We further observe that the assessee also remained non-compliant even before the Assessing Officer and failed to submit any details or supporting evidence to establish the source of unexplained cash deposits. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, due compliances will be made and all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. The assessee shall submit all relevant bank statements and supporting documents before the Assessing Officer and shall comply with the notices issued by the Revenue authorities without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

ITA No. 1443/Ahd/2026 Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 22.06.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 22 .06.2026 MV आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy

सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →