ALKESHBHAI CHIMANBHAI BAROT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD 1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 177/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 October 2026AY 2017-1813 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that for AY 2017-18, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to the assessee's non-compliance. While the assessee claimed the cash deposits were business receipts and bank credits related to credit card transactions, the AO treated them as unexplained for want of documentary evidence. The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's submission that the appeal was dismissed on non-compliance and requested a hearing on merits. For AY 2023-24, the AO estimated net profit at 1% of turnover, and the CIT(A) confirmed this due to the assessee's non-compliance at the appellate stage. The assessee argued that the estimation was arbitrary and requested an opportunity to present evidence. The Tribunal found that the assessee had furnished some details at the assessment stage but failed to do so at the appellate stage. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2023-24 and restore the issue of the Rs. 83,37,333/- addition to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee an opportunity to furnish evidence. The appeals were allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Alkeshbhai Chimanbhai Barot, filed appeals against orders of the CIT(A) for Assessment Years (AY) 2017-18 and 2023-24. For AY 2017-18, the AO made additions of Rs. 12,00,000/- (cash deposits), Rs. 1,16,93,653/- (bank credits), and Rs. 43,27,142/- (credit card payments) under sections 69A and 69. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance. For AY 2023-24, the AO estimated net profit at 1% of turnover, resulting in an addition of Rs. 83,37,333/-. The CIT(A) confirmed this addition, again due to the assessee's non-compliance. The assessee's appeals before the ITAT are based on grounds including ex-parte orders, confirmation of additions, and failure to consider evidence.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte orders for AY 2017-18 and AY 2023-24, thereby failing to adjudicate the issues on merits? (Question of law and fact) 2. Whether the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) for AY 2017-18, aggregating to Rs. 1,72,20,795/- on account of unexplained cash deposits, bank credits, and credit card payments, are justified under Sections 69 and 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (Question of law and fact) 3. Whether the addition of Rs. 83,37,333/- made by the AO for AY 2023-24, by estimating the net profit at 1% of turnover, is justified, and whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to present evidence? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's Contentions: - The additions for AY 2017-18 were not justified as the cash deposits were from brokerage receipts and bank credits related to credit card swipes/transfers, and the AO failed to properly appreciate the evidence. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on non-compliance, not merits. - For AY 2023-24, the addition was made by estimating profit without proper examination of details and supporting documents. The assessee requested an opportunity to substantiate the claim before the CIT(A). Revenue's Contentions: - The Sr. DR relied on the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 142(1),Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 69,Section 144B,Section 270A,Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI GANGADHAR PANDA

For Appellant: Shri Mohit Balani, AR
For Respondent: Shri Deependra Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.08.2026Pronounced: 13.10.2026

PER GANGADHAR PANDA - ACCOUNTANTMEMBER:

Both appeals filed by the same assesses are directed against the separate orders dated 01.12.2025 and 21.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “NFAC”], Delhi arising out of the assessment orders for the A.Y. 2017-18 completed on dated 16.12.2019 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), and for the A.Y. 2023-24 completed on dated 25.03.2025 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Since both the appeals are involved identical/connected issues, the same were heard together and

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 142(1)

All 17,244 judgments and leading authorities on Section 142(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →