BASTIMAL PARMAR DINESH KUMAR,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(2)(1), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

ITA 353/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 September 2026AY 2020-215 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the dispute concerned the disallowance of business expenses of Rs. 10,77,700. The AO made the disallowance primarily due to a lack of complete supporting evidence. The assessee claimed to have furnished detailed submissions and documents to the Ld. CIT(A), but the Ld. CIT(A) proceeded on the premise that no such submissions were filed. The Tribunal observed that the Ld. CIT(A)'s order itself recorded that the assessee made a submission on 27.08.2025. The assessee also filed a paper book before the Tribunal containing supporting documents. Therefore, the Tribunal found that the assessee's claim required examination based on supporting evidence, which had not been considered or verified by the lower authorities. In the interest of justice and fair play, and considering that both the Ld. AR and Ld. DR agreed to restore the issue to the AO for verification, the Tribunal set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO was directed to consider the submissions and supporting evidence, examine the allowability of expenses, and provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside, and Ground No. 4 was allowed for statistical purposes. Other grounds were dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Bastimal Parmar Dinesh Kumar, an individual insurance agent, filed a return of income for Assessment Year 2020-21 in response to a notice under section 148. The assessee disclosed revenue from operations and interest income, claiming business expenses totaling Rs. 31,94,500. The Assessing Officer (AO) called for supporting documents. The assessee provided ledger accounts and bank statements. The AO disallowed Rs. 41,000 of rent paid in cash, Rs. 3,86,200 of salary paid in cash, Rs. 6,24,800 of business expenses for lack of evidence, Rs. 11,700 (30%) of electricity expenses, and Rs. 14,000 of vehicle repair expenses, totaling Rs. 10,77,700. The AO completed the assessment under section 147 read with section 144B at a total income of Rs. 27,79,900. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal ex-parte, confirming the disallowance.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of business expenses of Rs. 10,77,700 towards rent, electricity, salary, and other expenses without properly considering the submissions and documentary evidence filed before him, as per Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that expenditure was incurred in the normal course of business. Detailed submissions and supporting documents were furnished before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) erred in observing that no submissions were filed and dismissed the appeal ex-parte. The assessee relied on the fact that the AO accepted business receipts and that detailed submissions were made before the CIT(A). Revenue's Contention: The revenue supported the orders of the lower authorities, stating that disallowances were made due to the assessee's failure to furnish complete supporting evidence before the AO. However, the Ld. DR fairly submitted that the issue may be restored to the AO for verification, considering the need for factual verification of documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 148,Section 147,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

PER SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The present appeal filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2020-21 is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereafter the Ld. CIT(A)) passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter the Act) vide order dated 07.11.2025. 2. The assessee has raise

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 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →