AMITSINGH VRAJSINGH BHADORIYA,AHMEDABAD V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 262/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Amitsingh Vrajrajsingh Bhadoriya, the appellant, contesting an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which upheld a significant addition to his income and the subsequent levy of penalty for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The addition was based on alleged unaccounted cash deposits in a bank account linked to the appellant's business of mattress trading. The appellant argued that the bank account in question did not belong to him, and all deposits were from legitimate business sales. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer had not conclusively proven the ownership of the disputed bank account and remanded the case for a thorough reassessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 41247 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B P SRIVASTAV
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN AGARWAL

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR.BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI T.R SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. Nos.261-262/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year:2017-18) Amitsingh Vrajrajsingh Bhadoriya, 260, Kumbhajis Chawl, Opp. Saibaba Society, Khodiyarnagar Meghaninagar, Ahmedabad-380016. Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(1), Ahmedabad. [PAN No.BKYPB3121N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR Respondent by: Shri BP Srivastav, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 03.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement 04.02.2025 O R D E R PER: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT: Delay Condoned The captioned two appeals have been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi vide order dated 30.01.2023 for the Assessment Year 2019-20 involving quantum addition and levy of penalty. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- (1) Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on facts in dismissing appeal on ground of limitation without deciding the case on merits. (2) Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact in upholding addition of Rs.4,00,82,154/- made by Ld.AO u/s.69A being amount deposited in bank accounts. ITA Nos. 261-262/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year 2017-2018 - 2– 3. In this case, an addition of Rs.4,00,82,154/- has been made by the Assessing Officer based on the information received from the Operation insight of the revenue. The addition has been made on the basis of cash deposits in the bank account No.916010042512876 (page no. 6 of the assessment order). 4. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee had only one bank account i.e No.915020054131377 wherein the total cash deposits were to the tune of Rs.1,00,00,000/- plus. It was submitted that the assessee is in the business of Mattress trading and all these deposits were made out of the sales of Mattresses. The Ld. AR submitted that the bank account No. 916010042512876 which was relied by the revenue does not belong to him and even the assessment order has not brought anything on record to prove that this bank account belong to the assessee. On the other hand, the Ld. AR argued that both accounts could have been belonging to the assessee. We find that the AO has not brought on record the bank account of the assessee as per the information received from internal resources. Hence, the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer with directions to obtain the statements from the bank as to whether the bank account No.916010042512876 ( not given by the assessee) and No.915020054131377 (given by the assessee) stands in the name of assessee or not and then verify the total cash deposits with the turnover declared by the assessee, examine and reconcile it with the assessee’s bank account and to pass assessment order de novo. 5. Since the quantum addition stands set-aside to the Assessing Officer for framing of the assessment de novo, the penalty levied on the addition is ITA Nos. 261-262/Ahd/2024 Asst.Year 2017-2018 - 3– hereby deleted. The AO is at liberty to initiate penalty based on the outcome of the assessment order passed in consequence to this order. The assessee shall comply to all the notices issued by the AO from time to time failing which, the AO shall initiate penalty proceedings as per the provisions of the Act. 6. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 04.02.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 04.02.2025 Manish, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडᭅ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad "