SWAPNIL PRABHAKAR NAIK,KHANDOLA MARCELA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(3) PANAJI, PANAJI

ITA 121/PAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 November 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE (Judicial Member), SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI (Accountant Member)10 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee had submitted voluminous documentary evidence online to the CIT(A) which was overlooked, constituting a violation of the principles of natural justice. Citing judicial precedents, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remitted the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, directing consideration of all evidence already on record and the issuance of a speaking order under section 250(6).

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in IMFL trading, had additions made to his income under Section 143(3) for Assessment Year 2017-18, specifically an 8% profit on differential sales turnover (₹8,87,946) and unexplained cash credits of ₹3,80,000 from SBN deposits u/s 68. The CIT(A) upheld these additions, dismissing the assessee's appeal, purportedly for lack of documentary evidence.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the additions regarding differential sales turnover and unexplained SBN deposits were valid. 2. Whether the CIT(A) violated natural justice by dismissing the appeal without considering the assessee's submitted documentary evidence. 3. Whether the provisions of Section 5A of the Income Tax Act, along with the Portuguese Civil Code, limit the assessment to 50% of the additions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 253(1),Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 68,Section 5A,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, GOA

Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI

For Appellant: Mr Vinesh Pikale [‘Ld. AR’]
For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Pronounced: 13/11/2025

PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; This appeal is instituted u/s 253(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’] by the assessee which challenges DIN & Order No 1075327876(1) dt. 31/03/2025 passed by Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal-6, Mumbai [‘Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC’] u/s 250 of the Act which confirmed order of assessment dt. 27/12/2019 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Panaji, Goa [‘Ld. AO’].

ITAT-Panaji Swapnil Prabhakar Naik Vs ITO ITA No.: 121/PAN/2025 AY: 2017-18

2.

We note that, the assessee individual was engaged in trading business of Indian made foreign liquor [‘IMFL’], who

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →