MOHAMMED RABBON,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(2)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 2122/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 September 2026AY 2016-20174 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal. Regarding the addition of Rs. 13,40,160/- under section 69A, the Tribunal noted that while the assessee claimed cash deposits were from earlier withdrawals, no reconciliation statement was provided either before the CIT(Appeals) or the Tribunal. The onus was on the assessee to furnish such reconciliation. The Tribunal also observed that the CIT(Appeals) categorically denied the existence of a remand report, and the assessee's contention of a favorable remand report was not substantiated. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(Appeals)'s order in confirming the addition due to the lack of reconciliation and information on disputed credits. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee were dismissed. The Tribunal did not explicitly address the sustainability of the section 148 notice or the assessment being based on different reasons, as the primary issue of reconciliation for the sustained addition led to the dismissal.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Mohammed Rabbon, engaged in manpower services, filed a return of income for Assessment Year 2016-2017. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 144 based on information of Rs. 12 lakhs in cash deposits with M/s. I Monetary Advisory. The AO noted that these deposits did not commensurate with the admitted gross total income of Rs. 51,51,014/-. The AO added Rs. 8,327/- as unexplained money (Section 69A) for a difference in professional charges received from M/s. Aragen Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Rs. 68,024/- as unexplained cash credit (Section 68) for a difference in deposits with I Monetary Advisory, and Rs. 13,40,160/- as unexplained money (Section 69A) for differences in bank account credits with ICICI Bank. The CIT(Appeals) deleted the additions of Rs. 8,327/- and Rs. 68,024/- but sustained the addition of Rs. 13,40,160/-.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the notice issued under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the Assessing Officer is sustainable in law, and consequently, whether the assessment should be annulled? (Question of law) 2. Whether the assessment was made on reasons different from those recorded for reopening, thus warranting annulment? (Question of mixed law and fact) 3. Whether the CIT(Appeals) erred in holding that no remand report was sent by the Assessing Authority? (Question of fact) 4. Whether the addition of Rs. 13,40,160/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(Appeals) under section 69A is justified? (Question of mixed law and fact) Assessee's contentions: The assessee argued that bank credits cannot all be treated as income, as some are cash deposits from earlier withdrawals and non-revenue receipts. The cash book and bank statements were filed before the AO and CIT(Appeals) but not considered. A favorable remand report was allegedly called for by the CIT(Appeals). The addition of Rs. 13,40,160/- is duly explained. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 133(6),Section 69A,Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.

For Respondent: Shri. Pradeep S - Addl. CIT
Pronounced: 29.09.2026

PER SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) NFAC Delhi vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2026-27/1089074518(1) dated 19-May-2026 for the Assessment Year 2016-2017, arising out of the Order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 22.05.2023. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are assessee is engaged in the busin

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 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →