HARESHKUMAR HASHMUKHLAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1)(OLD WARD-5(2)(4)), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to submit necessary details before the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). However, to provide an opportunity, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for de-novo assessment, with directions for the assessee to provide all documents.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) upholding the reopening of assessment and additions made under sections 69A and 69 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's action due to the assessee's failure to provide details regarding cash deposits despite multiple notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the reopening of assessment is valid and if the additions made under sections 69A and 69 are justified, given the assessee's failure to provide supporting evidence.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2014-15.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
1. The order passed by Ld.CIT(A) is against law, equity & justice.
2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding validity of reopening of assessment though reopening of assessment is based on incorrect data.
The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding addition made by the Ld.AO u/s.69A of the Act of Rs.15,04,000/- 4. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding addition made by the AO u/s.69 of the Act on Rs.4,85,455/- 5. The appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal
before final appeal.
3. On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 13.01.2021, 22.02.2022, 15.12.2023, 19.02.2024, 28.03.2024 & 24.04.2024, requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation regarding the source of cash deposits. Despite various notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee failed to submit any submissions/documents. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We also find that the assessee even failed to submit any details/supporting evidence to prove the source of the cash deposit before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of Assessing officer for conducting assessment de-novo, after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 12.08.2025.
Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 12.08.2025 MV आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026