SHREE MAHALAXMI NAGARI SAHAKARI PATPEDHI LIMITED,AMBERNATH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2) FACELESS, KALAYN

ITA 3280/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 October 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the core dispute revolved around the source of the Rs. 99,00,000/- fixed deposit and its reporting against the old PAN. The assessee claimed the investment originated from matured fixed deposits and was accounted for under its new PAN. However, the NFAC confirmed the addition due to an unestablished fund trail and lack of correlation with the books of account. The Tribunal found that the documents submitted by the assessee, including details of matured fixed deposits, bank transactions, financial statements, returns filed under the new PAN, and updated Form 26AS, warranted proper examination and reconciliation. Therefore, in the interest of substantial justice, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and restored the matter to the file of the NFAC for fresh adjudication. The NFAC was directed to examine the documentary evidence, specifically the source and maturity proceeds of earlier fixed deposits, the subsequent investment, its accounting treatment, and the PAN correction by the bank. The NFAC was also to verify returns and financial statements filed under the new PAN and determine the addition afresh after providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the addition.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shree Mahalaxmi Nagari Sahakari Patpedhi Limited, is in appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2020-21. The Assessing Officer had made an addition of Rs. 99,00,000/- under Section 69 read with Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for alleged unexplained investment in fixed deposits. The NFAC confirmed this addition, stating the assessee failed to establish a complete fund trail and reconcile the investment with its books of account. The assessee contended that the fixed deposit was made from the proceeds of earlier matured fixed deposits and that the bank had initially reported it against an old PAN, which was later rectified. The assessee also submitted bank statements, financial statements, and updated Form 26AS.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the addition of Rs. 99,00,000/- on account of alleged unexplained investment in fixed deposits is sustainable in law, considering the assessee's claim that the investment was made from matured fixed deposits and duly accounted for under its new PAN? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 69 and Section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961). Assessee's contentions: The investment of Rs. 99,00,000/- was made from the proceeds of earlier fixed deposits with Dombivali Nagari Sahakari Bank, which matured in June 2019. The concerned bank initially reported the fixed deposit against an old PAN (AAFTS4630M) instead of the new PAN (AAPAS9358H), a fact subsequently rectified. Relevant bank statements, financial statements, and updated Form 26AS were furnished to support the claim. The NFAC failed to properly examine and reconcile these documents. The assessee sought restoration of the matter for fresh consideration. Revenue's contentions: The assessee failed to substantiate the source of the investment by furnishing a complete and verifiable fund trail, relying on the orders of the authorities below.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 115BBE,Section 250,Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Appellant: Shri N A Kulkarni, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Basavraj Hiremath, CIT DR
Pronounced: 09.10.2026

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member

This appeal has been preferred by the ASSESSEE against the order dated 04.02.2026, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2020-21. 2. In the instant case, the Assessing Officer, vide assessment order dated 18.03.2025 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, made an addition o

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 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →