ABDULLAH ABOOBECKER,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 (1), TRIVANDRUM
What did the Tribunal hold?
The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not adjudicated all grounds, specifically the pleas that the order under section 148A(d) was illegal due to insufficient response time and non-disposal of objections.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an individual, did not file a regular return of income for AY 2016-17. The AO issued notices under section 148A(b) and 148, subsequently completing the assessment under section 147 r.w.s. 144, treating cash deposits as unexplained money.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the grounds of appeal, particularly concerning the validity of the proceedings initiated under section 148A due to alleged procedural deficiencies.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 139(1),Section 148A(b),Section 148A(d),Section 148,Section 147,Section 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JM
Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) dated 27.07.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual. No regular return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) was filed for AY 2016-17. Subsequently, the AO issued notice u/s. 148A(b) of the Act on 08.03.2023 directing the appellant to file response on or before 14.04.2023 and the order u/s.
2 Abdullah Aboobeeker 148A(d) was passed on 29.03.2023 and notice u/s. 148 was issued on 29.03.2023. Subsequently, the assessment was completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 on 28.03.2024 at a total
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.
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 139(1)
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs CIT (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal…ITA 658/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Nitinbhai Nanalal Badani, Rajkot vs CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal…ITA 485/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Mata Lachmi Rotary Charitable Society… vs Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward - 1…ITA 310/RJT/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Md. Akhtar Ansari, Proprietor Of M/S Indian Associates vs. State Of Jharkhand, Through Commissioner Of State Tax, Commercial Tax Dept.Jharkhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Amarjothi Granites (INDIA) PVT. LTD., Berhampur, Ganjam vs. The Commissioner, Commercial Tax And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Mishka Steels LLP And Anr. vs. The Superintendent Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Cx, Range-Ii, Behala Div. And Ors.Calcutta · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Gujarat Co-Operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited vs. Union Of INDIAGujarat · 14 Oct 2026
- Ramesh K Devadiga vs. Khernagar Nandadeep Co Operative Housing Society LTDBombay · 14 Oct 2026