JAVEED SYED,BANGALORE KARNATAKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2)(1) BANGALORE, BANGALORE KARNATAKA

ITA 1404/BANG/2026Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 September 2026AY 2015-164 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's non-cooperation with the revenue authorities during both assessment and first appellate proceedings. However, in the interest of substantial and natural justice, the Tribunal decided to provide the assessee with an opportunity to present documentary evidence supporting their grounds and return of income. Consequently, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the issues were remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication (de novo). The assessee was directed to cooperate in the remand proceedings. If the assessee failed to cooperate, the CIT(A) was granted liberty to adjudicate the appeal based on the available material. The Tribunal explicitly stated that the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Javeed Syed, failed to file a return of income for Assessment Year 2015-16. The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the case under Section 147, issuing notices under Section 148 and 142(1). Despite show cause notices and requests for information, the assessee provided limited documents. The AO proceeded to make an ex-parte assessment under Section 144, adding ₹75,30,150/- to the total income, comprising unexplained cash deposits (Section 68), unexplained investments (Section 69), and unexplained money (Section 69A). The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), but did not comply with any notices, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without a de novo adjudication, despite the assessee's non-compliance, turning on the principles of natural justice and substantial justice. Assessee's contentions: The assessee did not file any submissions or appear before the Tribunal. The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the assessee. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue, through the Ld. DR, argued that the assessee had remained non-compliant before both lower authorities and therefore prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be upheld.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 151,Section 148,Section 142(1),Section 68,Section 69,Section 69A,Section 133(6)

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. N. Balusamy - JCIT
Pronounced: 22.09.2026

PER SHRI BALAKRISHNAN S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals NFAC Delhi vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1084910039(1) dated 19-Jan-2026 for the Assessment Year 2015-16, arising out of the Order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 06.03.2023. ITA 1404/BANG/2026 JAVEED SYED

2.

The assessee has not filed his return of income for the Assessment Year 2015-

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 →