HITESH BALCHANDRA RAWAL,GANDHINAGAR V. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 1984/AHD/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Hitesh Balchandra Rawal against the appellate order confirming additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and for alleged Short Term Capital Gain. The assessee contested the additions made for unexplained investments and capital gains from shares of Gandhinagar Hotels Ltd., claiming that his Demat account was used fraudulently by another individual, Mr. Pritesh V. Joshi. The Tribunal found that the assessee had not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate his claims during the earlier proceedings and thus decided to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789940 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 22-11-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT
• Assessee Lawyers: VIJAY H PATEL
• Keywords: Set aside; Corroborative evidences; Unexplained investment
• Section: 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT And SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1984/Ahd/2024 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Hitesh Balchandra Rawal, Poojan Plot No.781/2, Sector-2C, Gandhinagar-382002. [PAN :AFEPR8090 N] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gandhinagar. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Vijay H Patel, AR Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 25.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 27.11.2025 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 22.10.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred on facts in Law in confirming the order of the lower Authority for addition of Rs.28,00,000/- u/s.69 of the I.T Act 1961 as alleged investment in shares of Gandhinagar Hotels Ltd. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1984/Ahd/2024 Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2– 2. That, the Hon’ble CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.1,83,55,000/- as alleged Short Term Capital Gain on sale of shares of Gandhinagar Hotels Ltd. 3. That, the appellant craves permission to modify, alter and amend, to withdraw or to raise addition ground eighter before the date of hearing or in course of hearing. 3. The assessee is an individual deriving income from professional receipts as an Advocate. Prior to starting his independent professional activities, he was associated with the Gandhinagar Group due to his close relationship with the promoters of the Gandhinagar Hotel Group. The assessee, with the intention of making small investments in the stock market, opened a Demat account with Angel Stock Broking Ltd. and had signed all Demat transaction slips, which were kept at the office premises of Hotel Haveli. Except for the purchase and sale of 297 shares of Power Grid Corporation Ltd., no other trading activity was carried out by the assessee through this account. However, based on the facts and records available, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee’s Demat account reflected the purchase of 1,00,000 shares of Gandhinagar Hotels Ltd. Since the assessee failed to provide any documentary evidence explaining the source of such investment, the Assessing Officer treated the same as unexplained investment and made an addition under section 69 of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer since the assessee failed to furnish any substantive documents or evidence to prove his claim. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1984/Ahd/2024 Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 3– 5. Aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 6. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. The assessee has contested the addition of Rs. 1,83,55,000/- made as Short-Term Capital Gain, contending that he had not sold any such shares nor received any sale proceeds. He further claimed that his Demat account was fraudulently used by Mr. Pritesh V. Joshi to carry out the impugned transactions. The assessee also submitted that a similar amount has already been assessed in the hands of Mr. Joshi, resulting in double taxation of the same income. However, the assessee has not furnished any evidence to demonstrate that the sale proceeds were credited to Mr. Joshi’s bank account as claimed. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, if given an opportunity, the assessee would furnish all necessary details, clarifications, and explanations before the Revenue authorities. Considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. The assessee is directed to submit all relevant bank statements, submissions, documents, supporting evidence and the details of action taken against Mr. Pritesh V Joshi for perpetrating fraud, impersonation or forgery committed before the Assessing Officer. The assessee shall comply with the notices issued by the Assessing Officer without seeking unnecessary adjournments. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1984/Ahd/2024 Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 4– 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 27.11.2025. S Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True C (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 27.11.2025 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 "