BHAVIN VINUBHAI THAKKAR,RADHANPUR V. THE ITO, WARD-3, PATAN

ITA 1587/AHD/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Bhavin Vinubhai Thakkar against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2017-18. The primary issues in the appeal included the addition of Rs.40,55,603 as unexplained cash in hand as of April 1, 2016, the incorrect application of the tax rate under section 115BBE, and the initiation of penalty proceedings under section 270A for alleged underreporting of income. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided sufficient documentary evidence, including bank statements, to support his claims, which the Assessing Officer was directed to re-examine.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 784529 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 19-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAVINDRA
• Assessee Lawyers: BANDISH SOPARKAR
• Keywords: Initiation of penalty proceedings

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1587/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Bhavin Vinubhai Thakkar, I-128, Ambikanagar, Radhanpur-385340. Gujarat. [PAN :ADYPT4502 H] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Patan. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Bandish Soparkar, AR Respondent by: Shri Ravindra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.11.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 20.06.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at National Faceless Appeal centre has erred in upholding the addition of Rs.40,55,603/- being opening balance of cash in hand as on 01.04.2016 as unexplained money u/s.69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1587/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case well as in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant disregarding the fact that the opening balance of cash-in hand as on 01.04.2016 is part of the cash withdrawals from bank accounts in the F.Y 2015-16 and balance as on 31.03.2016. Therefore, addition if any needs to be made in assessment year 2016-17 instead of assessment year 2017-18. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) at National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in upholding the applicable tax rate u/s.115BBE disregarding the fact that the provisions of Section 115BBE are applicable prospectively from Assessment Year 2018-19. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) at National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in upholding initiation of penalty proceedings u/s.270A for alleged under reporting of income in spite of categorical demonstration by appellant with documentary evidence that there was no underreporting of any such income. 5. The appellant further reserves its right to add, alter, amend or modify any of the aforesaid grounds before or at the time of hearing of an appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer on the grounds that the assessee failed to produce documentary evidence supporting the opening cash balance and further assessee had withdrawn only a minor amount towards regular expenses. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) held that the cash-in-hand claimed by the assessee could not be accepted. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted copies of the bank account statements and the relevant ledgers. Considering the bank statements filed, we direct the Assessing Officer to examine the same and verify the factual availability of cash at the end of the year based on these records. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1587/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 14.11.2025. S /- Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 14.11.2025 MV आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "