RUPA MAHESHKUMAR GANDHI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 994/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 July 2025AY 2017-18Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee failed to provide crucial details and evidence for the cash deposits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order related to the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee failed to provide necessary details and explanations regarding cash deposits to the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), despite multiple notices and opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the matter should be remanded for de-novo assessment due to the assessee's failure to provide evidence for cash deposits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 69A,Section 68,Section 115BBE,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 271AAC,Section 272A(1)(d),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri Prakash D Shah with Shri Saiyam Shah, ARs
For Respondent: Shri Abhijit , Sr. DR
Hearing: 07.07.2025Pronounced: 15.07.2025

(Assessment Year: 2017-18) Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi, Income Tax Officer, Vs. D-404, Dharnidhar Tower, Ward-5(3)(2), Paldi, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-380007. [PAN :ABUPG5905 D] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Prakash D Shah with Shri Saiyam Shah, ARs Respondent by: Shri Abhijit , Sr. DR Date of Hearing 07.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 15.07.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 26.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:

1. That the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in law and facts by not quashing the assessment order passed under section 144 of the Act and therefore the Order passed by Assessing Officer is required to be quashed.

Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– 2. That the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in law and facts by confirming the addition of Rs.3,33,05,215/- under section 69A/68 of the Act and therefore, the learned AO should be directed to delete the said addition in full while computing the total income.

3.

That the Id. NFAC has erred in law and facts by confirming the action of the learned AO, by taxing the said addition under amended section 115BBE of the Act.

4. That the Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld.AO in levying interest u/s 234A/B/C of the Act.

5.

That the Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld.AO in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC and 272A(1)(d) of the Act.

6.

That your appellant craves a leave to add, alter or amend any grounds on or before the time of hearing.

3. On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 29.01.2021, 26.04.2022, 21.03.2023, 14.09.2023, 18.09.2023, 01.05.2024, 10.10.2024, 26.11.2024 & 09.12.2024, requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation regarding the source of cash deposits. Despite of various notices issued by the Ld.CIT (A), the assessee failed to submit any submission/documents and often sought adjournments. 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 the matter is remanded to the Assessing officer for conducting Rupa Maheshkumar Gandhi Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– assessment de-novo. 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.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 15.07.2025

Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 15.07.2025 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

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →