BHANWARLAL SHAH,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 529/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Bhanwarlal Shah, the assessee, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which had dismissed his appeal against the Assessing Officer's order. The Assessing Officer had reopened the case under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to substantial unexplained deposits in the assessee's bank account. The Tribunal observed repeated non-appearances and non-cooperation from the assessee, including refusal to accept notices and inconsistent explanations regarding the source of the deposits. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, confirming the addition of the unexplained credit to the assessee's income.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298737 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KALPESH RUPAVATIA
• Keywords: Unexplained cash credit
• Section: 147; 148; 250

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ ‘D’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.529/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Bhanwarlal Shah 45, Jekorbhai Chamber Opp: Madhav Baug Panchkuva Ahmedabad 380 001. PAN : CBTPS 6143 N Vs ITO, Ward-2(1)(2) Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr.DR सुनवाई क\t तारीख/Date of Hearing : 04/03/2025 घोषणा क\t तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 07/03/2025 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश/O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER The above appeal has been filed by the assessee against order passed by the Ld.Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “ld.CIT(A)] dated 22.01.2024 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\" for short) dismissing the appeal of the assessee against the order of the Assessing Officer (AO) passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee at the time of hearing today nor filed any application seeking adjournment giving reasons for non-appearance. It is noted that the appeal has been listed for ITA No.529/Ahd/2024 2 hearing on twelve occasions. On the earlier occasions, when the matter came up for hearing, adjournment was sought repeatedly by the ld.counsel for the assessee, Shri Sulabh Padshah. On 26.12.2024 when the matter came up for hearing, the ld.counsel for the assessee filed a letter seeking to withdraw his power of attorney. Accordingly the matter was adjourned to 4.2.2025. Thereafter on 4.2.2025, as there was no appearance on behalf of the assesse, the matter was again adjourned to 4.3.2025. On this date also there was no appearance on behalf of the assessee. 3. We have observed that the notices of hearing issued to the address mentioned in Form No. 36 of the appeal filed by the assessee have been returned with the remark \"left.\" Also, the notice served upon the assessee for the hearing on 04.03.2025 was returned with the remark \"refused.\" This conduct indicates that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the appeal. More than two months have elapsed since the withdrawal of the previous counsel’s power of attorney; however, the assessee has neither taken steps to appoint a new counsel to argue the case nor appeared before us to provide reasons for not arguing the matter. Furthermore, it is noted that the assessee has refused to accept the notices issued for the present appeal hearing. Such behavior reflects a non-cooperative attitude and a disregard for judicial proceedings. 4. Further, it has been observed that even before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee failed to appear despite multiple notices issued for the hearing. The Ld.CIT(A) has also noted that no written submissions were filed in support of the grounds raised in the appeal. Furthermore, before the AO, the assessee provided inconsistent and varying explanations in response to the notices issued during the assessment proceedings. ITA No.529/Ahd/2024 3 5. As per the assessment order, the AO had information regarding substantial deposits amounting to Rs.2.05 crores credited to the assessee’s bank account maintained with HDFC Bank, Navrangpura Branch, during the relevant year. The AO had further information indicating that the said amount was transferred via RTGS/NEFT from the bank account of one Shri Durgesh Anandbhai Davada, proprietor of M/s. Harbhole Enterprise, a business entity engaged in cheque discounting and cash transactions for various persons and entities. It was further noted that the assessee had subsequently transferred funds to various parties through RTGS/NEFT after receiving cash deposits. Given that the assessee was identified as one of the beneficiaries receiving funds from M/s. Harbhole Enterprise, and considering the substantial discrepancy between the credited amount of Rs.2.05 crores and the income declared by the assessee amounting to Rs.3.99 lakhs, the case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee. 6. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee initially explained that the amount received from M/s. Harbhole Enterprise represented a loan obtained for business purposes. The assessee contended that he was engaged in trading on various exchanges, including shares, currency, and commodities. In support of this claim, the assessee submitted a copy of the account statement of M/s. Harbhole Enterprise, reflecting a loan amount of Rs.2.05 crores. However, upon further inquiry by the AO regarding the utilization of the alleged loan amount, the assessee changed his stand and claimed that the funds received from M/s. Harbhole Enterprise were actually against the sale of cloth. He changed his stand and contended that the assessee was engaged in the textile trading ITA No.529/Ahd/2024 4 business. Audited profit and loss account, balance sheet for the relevant year was furnished alongwith confirmation from M/s. Harbhole Enterprise stating that the amount was received as payment for goods sold. 7. The AO noted the conflicting explanations provided by the assessee and confronted him with these inconsistencies. However, instead of offering a satisfactory response, the assessee failed to provide any further explanation. Consequently, the AO treated the entire amount of Rs.2.05 crores received from M/s. Harbhole Enterprise as unexplained credit and added it to the total income of the assessee. 8. It is, therefore, evident that the assessee has not cooperated even during the assessment proceedings. The assessee does not seem to be aware of the seriousness of the proceedings, giving conflicting explanations as suits his whims and fancies without even caring to explain the inconsistencies in the explanation. 9. In view of the aforementioned facts, as emerging from the orders of the Revenue authorities and the material available on record, it is apparent that the assessee has adopted a lackadaisical approach and has not demonstrated seriousness or diligence in pursuing the matter before the Tribunal or the Revenue authorities. The conduct of the assessee suggests an intention to merely delay proceedings rather than substantively engage with the case. Looking to the non-serious approach and the undue wastage of judicial time, we do not find it appropriate to grant any further opportunities for hearing. As no satisfactory explanation has been furnished regarding the amounts received from M/s. Harbhole Enterprise, we have no alternative but to confirm the order of the learned CIT(A), upholding the addition ITA No.529/Ahd/2024 5 made in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, we confirm the impugned order. 10. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 7th March, 2025 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad,dated 07/03/2025 "