ROHIT BOHARA ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 27(3), MUMBAI
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 9333/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2026AY 2019-20
Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal(Physical Hearing) Rohit Bohra, Dcit-Circle27(3), B-3501, Bhagwati Eleganza, Vs Room No. 423, Vrccl, Plot No. 12, Sector 11, Ghansoli, Sector 30, Navi Mumbai, Navi Mumbai – 400709. Vashi – 400703. [Pan No. Ahqpb6511] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Aditya Ramachandran, Ca Revenue By Shri Ujjwal Kumar – Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per: Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (In Short, The Ld. Cit(A)) Dated 09/10/2025 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Appeal Of The Appellant Before The Cit (A) May Please Be Restored Back & The Non-Compliance Of The Appellant In Respect Of The Notices Issued By The Cit (A) May Please Be Excused As It Was For The Genuine Reasons. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ld. Assessing Officer In Adding Time Deposits Amounting To Rs 10,00,000 Under Section 69 Of The Act On The Ground That The Appellant Was Unable To Prove Its Corresponding Source. Rohit Bohra
Section 254(1)Section 69Section 80C
Assessee by Shri Aditya Ramachandran, CA
Revenue by Shri Ujjwal Kumar – SR. DR
Date of hearing
10.03.2026
Date of pronouncement
10.03.2026
Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act
PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned
Commissioner
