MINESH MEHTA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2)(6), SURAT

Minesh Mehta Income Tax Officer 401 Diamond Apartment, Ward-3(2)(6), Nagoriwad, Saiyedpura, Vs Surat Surat, Gujarat-395003 PAN: AAYPM2048Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Rasesh Shah, CA Revenue Represented: Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 05-05-2025 Date of pronouncement : 07-05-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 26.10.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2020-21.

A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 2 Minesh Mehta vs. ITO

1. On facts 1 On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of assessing officer in making the addition of Rs. 79,18,52,136/- u/s 68 on account of alleged unexplained cash credit being unsecured loans.

2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of assessing officer A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 3 Minesh Mehta vs. ITO in making the addition of Rs. 38,33,09,647/- u/s 68 on account of alleged unexplained cash credit being sundry creditors.

3. It is therefore prayed that the above addition made by the assessing officer and confirmed by CIT(A) may please be deleted.

4. Appellant craves leave to add, alter or delete any ground(s) either before or in the course of hearing of the appeal.

5. Ld. Counsel Mr. Rasesh Shah appearing for the assessee submitted before us a Paper Book running to 222 pages wherein the additional documents filed before Ld. CIT(A) namely bank statements, ledger account, ITR copies, etc. Thus Ld. Counsel pleaded that the Ld. CIT(A) without admitting the additional evidences and without calling for Remand Report from the A.O., dismissed the appeal. Therefore requested one more opportunity be given to the assessee to explain its case before the Assessing Officer with the relevant details and documents.

6. Per contra, Ld. CIT-DR Shri Mukesh Jain appearing for the Revenue supported the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and submitted that the assessee has not produced these documents before the Assessing Officer, hence the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) does not require any interference.

7. We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record including the Paper Book filed by the assessee. From Page Nos. 115 to 222 of the Paper Book, the assessee filed ledger account, contra confirmation bank account and ITR copies. However without entertaining the same and without calling for the Remand Report from the Assessing Officer, A.Y. 2020-21 Page No 4 Minesh Mehta vs. ITO Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, which is against the Principle of Natural Justice. Therefore, we deem it fit to setaside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to look into additional evidences filed by the assessee and then pass assessment order in accordance with law by giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Needless to say that the assessee should make use of this final opportunity by filing all necessary details, records before the Assessing Officer for passing fresh assessment order.

Order pronounced under proviso to Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 07-05-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (BIJAYANANDA PRUSETH) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 07/05/2025 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, सूरत