DIXITKUMAR KANTIBHAI PATEL,ANAND, GUJARAT V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, ANAND, ANAND, GUJARAT

ITA 1093/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Dixitkumar Kantibhai Patel, against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed an addition of 3,72,72,600 under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. This addition was made on account of unexplained investments by the assessee for the Assessment Year 2018-2019. The assessee argued that he was not given a fair opportunity to present his case during the assessment proceedings, and the additional submissions made before the CIT(A) were not considered adequately. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's arguments and decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order, restoring the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833407 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NITIN VISHNU KULKARNI
• Assessee Lawyers: AMRIN PATHAN
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 68; 2

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद \u0011ायपीठ “सी“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD \u0016ी संजय गग\u001a, \u0011ाियक सद\u001b एवं \u0016ी मकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद\u001b क े सम!। ] ] Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.1093/Ahd/2024 िनधा \u000fरण वष\u000f /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Dixitkumar Kantibhai Patel Nr. Maheshwari Palace Vallabh Vidyanagar University Circle Anand – 388 120 बनाम/ v/s. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Anand – 388 001 \u0013थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AGZPP 4489 R (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee by : Ms. Amrin Pathan, AR Revenue by : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 12/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 03/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 27/03/2024 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2018-2019. 2. The assessee, in this appeal, is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in confirming the edition made by the assessing officer of ₹.3,72,72,600 under Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1093/Ahd/2024 Dixitkumar Kantibhai Patel Anand vs. ITO Asst.Year : 2018-19 2 section 68 of the Act on account of explained investments made by the assessee. 3. At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee could not furnish the required details to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer (AO) during the assessment proceedings resulting into the making of the impugned additions. However, the assessee furnished certain additional submissions and evidences before the CIT(A), which were further forwarded by the CIT(A) to the AO for verification and comments. However, the assessing officer did not offer any comments. The learned CIT(A) even rejected the request of the assessee for virtual conference, or physical hearing before the assessing officer to justify the source of the capital. Thereafter, the learned CIT(A) observed that the AO had given ample opportunity to the assessee to present his case. He however, did not consider the details and evidences furnished by the assessee before him. The learned AR of the assessee, therefore, has submitted that the details and evidence furnished by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) remained to be considered, resulting into the confirmation of the impugned additions made by the assessing officer. He, therefore, has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the AO. 4. The learned DR, however, has relied upon the findings of the lower authorities. 5. After considering the arrival submissions, we are of the view, that interests of justice will be well-served if the assessee be given an opportunity to present his case before the AO. We, accordingly, set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO for de novo Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1093/Ahd/2024 Dixitkumar Kantibhai Patel Anand vs. ITO Asst.Year : 2018-19 3 assessment on the issue. Needless to say that the assessing officer will give proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present his case, then to pass the assessment order afresh in accordance with law. 6. With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 03 /02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Makarand V. Mahadeokar) Accountant Member ( Sanjay Garg ) Judicial Member िदनांक/Dated 03/02/2026 टी.सी.नायर, व.िन.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS आदेश की ितिलिप अ!ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\" / The Appellant 2. #थ\" / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु% / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु% ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- (NFAC), Delhi 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध , अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर , अहमदाबाद /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. 6. गाड\u000f फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स#ािपत ित //True Copy// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation (word processed by H-JM in his computer) : 2.2.2026 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member. : 2.2.2026 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S : 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement. : 5. Date on which fair order placed before Other Member : 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S. : 3.2.26 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk. : 3.2.26 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 Despatch of the Order : Printed from counselvise.com "