PALLAVI DEVANG TRIVEDI,GODHRA vs. NATIONA FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI (JURISDICTION AO : THE ITO, WARD-1), GODHRA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not consider the additional evidence filed by the assessee and passed an ex-parte order. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee received a gift of Rs. 15,00,000/- from her grandmother. The Assessing Officer made an addition of this amount under Section 69A as unexplained cash gifts. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred by not considering additional evidence and passing an ex-parte order, and whether the onus to prove the source of a gift from a relative was on the assessee under the relevant provisions.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 69A,Section 147,Section 148,Section 144,Section 143(1),Section 56(2)(vii)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against order dated 27.02.2024 passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the Assessment Year 2014-15.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-
“1. The Learned CIT(A) grossly erred in law and on facts by contending that the Appellant has failed to submit the relevant documents in support of Gift of Rs.15,00,000/- received from grandmother, Late Smi Shardaben Vadilal Patel during the year under consideration without considering the fact that the copy of declaration of gift was duly submitted as additional evidence along with Form 35 as per Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
2. The Leamed CIT(A) erred in law by grossly neglecting the fact that the onus to prove source of gift received from relative was not envisaged on the Appellant as per provisions of erstwhile Section 56(2)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) and thus, the provisions of Section 69A
of the Act cannot be invoked by treating the gift received from relative as unexplained money.”
The assessee is an individual and filed return of income on 27.03.2015 declaring income of Rs.2,13,800/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee is engaged in Gruh-Udhyog business i.e. cottage industry of manufacturing and trading of snacks and other packed home-made food items and trading of Sarees. On the basis of information available with the Department, the case was reopened under Section 147 of the Act after taking prior approval of the appropriate authority. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 31.03.2021 but the assessee did not reply the same. As per the provisions of Section 144 of the Act, the Assessing Officer proceeded on the basis. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.15,00,000/- under Section 69A in respect of cash gifts as received from her grandmother.
Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without giving opportunity to the assessee for filing the additional evidences as per Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) should have taken cognisance of the evidences filed before the CIT(A) but the same was not taken into account and, therefore, the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues on merit in consonance with the evidences filed by the assessee by way of additional evidences before the Tribunal.
The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A).
Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. After taking cognisance of the order of the CIT(A), it appears that the CIT(A) has not taken on record additional evidences filed by the assessee during the appellate proceedings before CIT(A). Besides this, the CIT(A) has passed order ex-parte and only confirmed the view of the Assessing Officer without giving any independent finding. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the CIT(A) thereby taking cognisance of the evidences submitted by the assessee before the CIT(A) and adjudicate the issues contested by the assessee on merit as per Income Tax Statute. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following the principles of natural justice.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open Court on this 6th September, 2024.
More judgments on Section 69A
- Vishal Kumar Patel(HUF), Raipur vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), RaipurITA 595/RPR/2026[2017-18]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Ashok Singh, Jaipur vs ACIT, Circle-2 Jaipur, JaipurITA 1540/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Neepaben Sunnybhai Motwani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, RajkotITA 875/RJT/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sukant Kumar vs. Union Of INDIA And 6 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S New Sana Brick Field vs. Union Of INDIA And 4 OthersAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Vinay Singh vs. Union Of INDIAAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Aaradhyam Infrabuilders PVT LTD vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
