What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acceded to the assessee's prayer for an opportunity to produce documents before the Joint Assessing Officer (JAO). The JAO was directed to verify the evidences and then pass the assessment order.

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 30,75,000/- in respect of cash deposits in the assessee's bank account. The assessee claimed these were sale proceeds, loans, and gifts, but provided no supporting documents to the AO or CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Opportunity to produce evidence of cash deposits before the lower authority for proper verification.

Nitin Madhukar Mahajan, Vadodara vs ITO | ITAT Surat 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT “SMC” BENCH, SURAT

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Nitin Madhukar Mahajan

For Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. D.R

Hearing: 19.01.2026Pronounced: 21.01.2026

O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

This is an appeal filed against the order dated 05-04-2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2010-11.

The assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 30,75,000/- in respect of cash deposits made in the bank account with Axis Bank. The assessee submitted that these are the amounts earned by the assessee through sale proceeds of car, loan borrowed from friends and relatives, gift received from father in law and brother. However, neither before the A.O. nor before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee has not given any relevant documents. It was prayed that given an opportunity the assessee would produce all the documents before the JAO, the prayer of the ld. A.R. is acceded

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

NITIN MADHUKAR MAHAJAN,VADODARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4), BHARUCH

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments