HANOZE HARISH THAKKAR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 19(1)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 9314/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 September 2026AY 2014-157 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment and first appeal were decided ex parte. The Assessing Officer made additions for salary, interest, commission, business income, and unexplained investment in immovable property. The assessee also claimed credit for TDS which was not granted.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the addition for unexplained investment and restored it to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication, directing the assessee to provide supporting documents. The Tribunal also directed the Assessing Officer to verify and grant credit for TDS as admissible.

What were the issues?

Whether additions made by the AO and sustained by the CIT(A) were justified without proper opportunity to the assessee, and whether TDS credit was correctly denied.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 198,Section 199,Section 205

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, HON’BLE

PER SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

ITA 9314/MUM/2025 HANOZE HARISH THAKKAR

The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 18/12/2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”), Delhi, [hereinafter referred to as “Ld.CIT(A)”] for Assessment Year 2014-15 on following grounds of appeal:

“1. In the facts and cir

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.

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 69

All 8,928 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →