ACIT,CIR.20(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI V. GIRISH SHAMJI CHHEDA, MUMBAI

ITA 3659/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves three appeals by the revenue against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2020-2021. The appeals challenged the deletion of penalties under sections 270A, 271AAC, and 271B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the CIT(A). The penalties were related to issues of underreported income, misreporting, and unexplained cash credits. The Tribunal's decision to dismiss the appeals was primarily based on the fact that the penalties were below the threshold limit set by the CBDT, which rendered the appeals non-viable for further proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 793173 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SWAPNIL CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: FENIL BHATT
• Keywords: Business income; Business expenditure; Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई| IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सुं./ITA No.3657, 3658 & 3659/MUM/2025 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-2021) ACIT, CIR. 20(1), Mumbai 3rd Floor, Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai 400012 v/s. बिाम Girish Shamji Chheda 227, Sukh Sagar, Bhalchandra Road, Matunga, Mumbai 400019 स्थायी लेखा सुं./जीआइआर सुं./PAN/GIR No: ACYPC2995G Appellant/अपीलाथी .. Respondent/प्रधिवादी धििााररिी की ओर से /Assessee by: Shri Fenil Bhatt, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Swapnil Choudhary – SR DR स िवाई की िारीख / Date of Hearing 23.09.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date of Pronouncement 24.09.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH :- These three appeals are filed by the revenue against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 13.03.2025 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year 2020-2021. 2. The revenue has raised the following grounds in these appeals. ITA No. 3657/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2020-21 “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting an amount of Rs.53,10,165/- levied u/s.270A of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee under reported income in consequence of misreporting amounting to Rs.1,47,99,790/- as per order u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the I T Act as the provisions of Printed from counselvise.com P a g e | 2 ITA No. 3657, 3658 & 3659/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2020-21 Girish Shamji Chheda section 270A(3) of the Act would be the difference between the amount of income assessed and the amount of income determined u/s.143(1)(a) of the I T Act. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in disallowance u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act as interest expenses of Rs.1,47,99,790/-, that the entire process is treated as assessee's business and as per section, direct nexus of the amount taken by the assessee for the investment is also proven. The expense claimed is also treated as business expenses. 3. The appellant prays that the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi on the above grounds be reversed and that of the AO be restored. 4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or submit additional ground which may be necessary.” ITA No. 3658/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2020-21 “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting an amount of Rs.25,91,727/- levied u/s. 271AAC(1) of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee is liable for penalty as the income determined includes referred to in section 68 as unexplained cash credits amounting to Rs.3,61,16,600/- 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the disallowance u/s.68 as unexplained cash credits of Rs.3,61,16,600/- as the assessee failed to prove the genuineness and creditworthiness of transactions of unsecured loans. The onus of proving the above is cast upon the assessee. 3. The appellant prays that the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi on the above grounds be reversed and that of the AO be restored. 4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or submit additional ground which may be necessary.” ITA No. 3659/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2020-21 “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- levied u/s.271B of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee is liable to get his accounts audited u/s.44AB of the I.T. Act, 1961 as the total turnover of the assessee during the year under consideration exceeded Rs.1 crore and also the fact that the entire interest expenses of Rs.1,47,99,790/- claimed by the assessee under the head 'Income from Other Sources' is treated as assessee’s business income as the direct nexus of the amount taken by the assessee for the investment is proven, treating the same as business expenses. 2. The appellant prays that the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi on the above grounds be reversed and that of the AO be restored. 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or submit additional ground which may be necessary.” Printed from counselvise.com P a g e | 3 ITA No. 3657, 3658 & 3659/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2020-21 Girish Shamji Chheda 3. At the outset Ld. AR, pointed out that amounts involved in all the three appeals against the penalty order u/s. 270A, 271AAC and 271B are below the threshold limit prescribed by the CBDT vide circular dated 17.09.2024, and hence these deserve to be dismissed. We have perused the penalty orders and it is seen that penalty imposed in all the three cases is below the threshold monetory limit of Rs. 60 lacs prescribed by the CBDT vide above mentioned circular. In view of above, all the three appeals of the revenue are hereby dismissed. 4. In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue are dismissed. Order is pronounced in the open court on 24.09.2025 Sd/- Sd/- PAWAN SINGH RENU JAUHRI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Place: Mumbai Dated:24.09.2025 Divya R. Nandgaonkar Stenographer आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. अिीिार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति, आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईि / Guard file. सत्यातिि प्रति //True Copy// आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER, सहायक िंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण / ITAT, Bench, Mumbai. Printed from counselvise.com "