KAUSHAL PRAVINKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 885/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 August 2025AY 2017-187 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. This was to ensure principles of natural justice were followed, despite the assessee's prior non-compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance. The Assessing Officer had made substantial additions based on alleged sham gifts and non-existent business transactions, treating cash deposits as unexplained money.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex parte without adjudicating the substantial additions on merits, and whether the assessee should be granted a final opportunity to present his case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BBE,Section 270A,Section 271AAC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, B BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: Smt. Anjana K. Shah, it was explained that the amount was received by her

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K Patel, AR
For Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr-DR
Hearing: 18/08/2025Pronounced: 20/08/2025

PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 04.12.2024 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →