DIPIKABEN DEVENDRAKUMAR SHAH,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-4(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1497/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves two appeals filed by Dipikaben Devendrakumar Shah against the orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2011-12. The first appeal challenged the quantum assessment proceedings under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the second appeal challenged the penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The primary contention was regarding the addition of Rs. 15,10,676 under section 69A of the Act, which the appellant argued was a double addition as it included amounts from an FDR made from cash deposits. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer had not adequately considered the appellant's cash withdrawals and deposits due to non-compliance at the initial assessment stage and decided to remand the case for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312189 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S. K. AGAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIN S. SHAH
• Keywords: Reopening of assessment
• Section: 148; 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1496 & 1497/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dipikaben Devendrakumar Shah, B-303, Ocean Colina, Nr. Vardan Tower, Naranpura, Ahmedabad-13 [PAN : BEYPS 8625 E] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(1), Ahmedabad (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Parin S. Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri S.K. Agal, Sr DR Date of Hearing 24.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.04.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- These two appeals have been filed by the Assessee—one challenging the quantum assessment proceedings u/s 144, and the other challenging the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\"). Both impugned orders were passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (\"CIT(A)\"), under Section 250 of the Act, dated 19.06.2024, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. 2. The assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:- “ITA No. 1496/Ahd/2024 1. The order passed by lower authorities is bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. The reopening of assessment u/s 148 of the Act is bad in law and required to be quashed. 3. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs. 15,10,676/-u/s 69A of the Act ignoring submission of the appellant. ITA No. 1496 & 1497/Ahd /2024 Dipikaben Devendrakumar Shah Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2– 4. Ld. NFAC ought to have consider the fact that FDR of Rs. 9,10,676/- was made from cash deposit of Rs. 6,00,000/- and accordingly, total addition would tantamount addition to double addition. 5. Ld. NFAC ought to have estimated certain percentage of profit rather than making addition of entire credit as appellant is doing gruh udyog activity. ITA No. 1497/Ahd/2024 The Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming penalty of Rs.3,13,330/- u/s 271(1)(c) ignoring submission of the appellant.” 3. In this case, an ex-parte order has been passed by the Assessing Officer. The Ld. CIT(A) summarily affirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Before us, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee has cash deposits as well as cash withdrawals which has not been considered by the Assessing Officer owning to assessee’s non-compliance before the Assessing Officer and prayed that, given an opportunity, due compliance would be made about the cash deposits and cash withdrawals before the Assessing Officer. Since the matter needs to be examined at primary level, the matter is being remanded to the Assessing Officer to pass an order de novo after examining the bank account in totality. 5. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 30.04.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 30/04/2025 btk ITA No. 1496 & 1497/Ahd /2024 Dipikaben Devendrakumar Shah Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 3– आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation …25.04.2025….. 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 25.04.2025 3. Other Member… 25.04.2025 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S … 25.04.2025…………. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement …..25.04.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S …….25.04.2025……………. 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk ….25.04.2025……….…. 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… "