LATE NOORULKALAM SHAIKH THROUGH HIS LH HUSNEJAMAL N SHAIKH ,SURAT V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(1) SURAT, SURAT

ITA 1/SRT/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the legal heir of Late Noorulkalam Shaikh against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, concerning the Assessment Year 2011-12. The primary issue in the appeal was the addition of Rs. 15,02,464 made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which pertained to unexplained cash deposits. The Tribunal noted that a similar issue had been addressed in the assessee's case for the earlier Assessment Year 2008-09, where it was decided that 20% of the cash deposits should be treated as income. The Tribunal found no distinguishing facts for the current assessment year and directed the Assessing Officer to follow the same approach, adjusting for any income already declared by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832326 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-01-2025
• Other Referred Cases: GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (259-ITR-19)
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: HIREN R.VEPARI
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1/SRT/2025 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Late Noorulkalam Shaikh Thru his LH Husnejamal N. Shaikh, 313, Phoolwadi, Survey No. 734, Saheb Telecom, Ved Road, Surat-395004 [PAN : AZVPS 7495 K] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Surat (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Hiren R. Vepari, CA Respondent by: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr DR Date of Hearing 19.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 19.01.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 23.10.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘Ld. CIT (A)’ in short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short) for Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “ (1) Validity of the assessment: The learned CIT(A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal particularly when the reasons recorded for reopening were not furnished, making the reopening fatal as it has violated the prescription of Supreme Court judgement in case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. (259-ITR-19). (2) Addition of Rs.15,02,464: The learned CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the addition of u/s. 68 being cash deposited into bank.” Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1/SRT/2025 - Late Noorulkalam Shaikh Through her LH Husnejamal N. Shaikh Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 2– 3. At the time of hearing before us, at the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that Ground No. 1 relating to the validity of reopening is not pressed. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 is dismissed as not pressed. 4. Ground No. 2 pertains to the addition of Rs. 15,02,464/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash deposits, which has been confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). 5. The relevant facts for adjudication of this issue are that during the assessment proceedings, subsequent to the order of the ITAT in the assessee’s own case for the earlier Assessment Year 2008–09 in ITA No. 139/SRT/2023, the Assessing Officer treated 20% of the cash deposits as income of the assessee. In the said earlier year, it was held that since the Revenue had accepted 20% of the cash deposits as income in the assessee’s case, and considering the fact that the assessee had expired and the legal heirs had agreed to the taxation of 20% of such deposits, the Assessing Officer was directed to compute 20% of the cash deposits as income. 6. Since the issue stands concluded in the assessee’s own case in the year 2008-09 and no distinguishing facts have been brought on record for the year under consideration, we see no reason to deviate from the earlier view. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to compute 20% of the cash deposits as income for the present Assessment Year as well. It is further noted that the assessee has already offered an amount of Rs. 1,49,736/- to tax in the return of income, as evident from the copy of the ITR placed at page 36 of the paper book. Therefore, the Assessing Officer shall give due credit for the income already offered while computing the addition. Accordingly, the addition is restricted to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1/SRT/2025 - Late Noorulkalam Shaikh Through her LH Husnejamal N. Shaikh Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2011-12 - 3– 20% of the cash deposits, subject to adjustment of the income already declared, and the balance addition is deleted. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Heard, dictated and pronounced in the open Court today on 19.01.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Surat; Dated 19/01/2026 btk 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 , अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर , /DR,ITAT, Surat, 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Surat 1. Date of dictation …dictated in the open court on..…19.01.2026….….. 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member … …19.01.2026………… 3. Other Member……19.01.2026…………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S …. 19.01.2026…………. 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement ....... 19.01.2026........ 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S ……19.01.2026…..…………. 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk …….….…. 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…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "