GAURANGBHAI BHAGUBHAI PATEL,VADODARA V. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), VADODARA

ITA 78/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Gaurangbhai Bhagubhai Patel, an agriculturist, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which confirmed the addition of Rs.16,86,664 to his income under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and initiated penalty proceedings under section 271AAC. The addition was based on unexplained cash deposits of Rs. 12 lakhs in three bank accounts during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer had doubts about the creditworthiness of the persons involved in the transactions and the authenticity of the agricultural activities claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal found that the Assessing Officer had not conducted any inquiry nor brought any evidence on record to substantiate the additions made.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 707051 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURESH CHAND MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIN SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside; Initiation of penalty proceedings

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.78/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Gaurangbhai Bhagubhai Patel, Khushi Transport, Hasapura, Fartikul, Dabhoi, Vadodara-391110. [PAN :ASDPP9199 G] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Vadodara. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Parin Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr DR Date of Hearing 03.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.07.2025 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 28.11.2024 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 appeals: 1. The order passed by lower authorities is bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in dismissing appeal ex-parte. Appellant prays that appeal may be set aside to file of AO or CIT(A) as your honours deems fit. ITA No. 78/Ahd/2025 Gaurangbhai B patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– 3. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.16,86,664/- of credit in bank accounts by invoking section 69A of the Act. 4. Initiation of penalty proceedings u/s.271AAC is unjustified. 5. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in taxing addition at higher rate as per section 115BBE of the Act. 6. Charging of Interest u/s.234A, 234B, 234C are unjustified. 3. The assessee had total cash deposits of Rs. 12 lakhs in three accounts deposited during demonetization period. Before the Assessing Officer the assessee submitted that he is an agriculturist and is doing agriculture on his own land. The assessee also furnished the 7/12 extracts of agricultural lands and also furnished the copies of a few sales bills. On perusal of the sales bills. The Assessing Officer held that it is not possible to identify the persons to whom the crop has been sold by the assessee on his own bill book. Further, the Assessing Officer held that a few bills were around Rs. 2 lakhs and 3 lakhs. It was also not justifiable whether the persons have paid this much amount in cash to the assessee and whether they have the creditworthiness or not. Assessing Officer held that no evidence to prove the agricultural activity done on the land and no satisfactory evidence regarding details of crops grown on the land, was furnished by the assessee. It was argued before us that the assessee had 10 acres of agricultural land as per 7/12 extracts and the Revenue Authorities failed to give due credence to the submission of the assessee. On going through the record before us, we find that no inquiry has been conducted by the Assessing Officer nor any evidence has been brought on record but made addition simply on surmises. Hence, in the absence of any material evidence, the addition ITA No. 78/Ahd/2025 Gaurangbhai B patel Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– made by the Assessing Officer on account of agricultural income as well as credit of Rs.2,61,664/- is hereby directed to be deleted. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 09.07.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 09.07.2025 MV देश 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 "