MAQSUDALI MAKBULALI SAIYED,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 2077/AHD/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Maqsudali Makbulali Saiyed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, which pertained to the assessment year 2011-12. The primary contention was the addition of Rs. 21,30,416 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, which the Assessing Officer claimed was undisclosed income. The appellant argued that these funds were legitimate business transactions related to his construction/labour activities. The Tribunal examined the submissions and the bank statements provided by the appellant, which indicated regular business activities including deposits and withdrawals that were not considered in the initial assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 840479 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VEERBADRAM VISLAVATH
• Section: 144; 44AD

Judgement Text

"THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Maqsudali Makbulali Saiyed, 9 Ram Rahim Nagar, B/H, Calico Mill No. Tekra, Behrampura, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380022 PAN: BFLPS2281C (Appellant) Vs The ITO, Ward-6(1)(1) Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by: Shri Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 12-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 26-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member: This is an appeal filed against the order dated 25-03- 2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2011-12. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1. The Ld. A.O., has erred in making addition of Rs. 21,30,416/- u/s 69A of the IT Act, without properly considering the withdrawal side of the bank statement of the appellant. 2. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing the appellate order without properly considering the submission made before him and allowed the appeal in part. Even the plea of the nature of the previous business activities has not been taken into account ITA No. 2077/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2011-12 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 2077/Ahd/2025 Maqsudali Makbulali Saiyed, A.Y. 2011-12 2 though the appellant had filed the return of income before A.Y. 2011-12 under business code 0505 and thereafter from A.Y. 2018-19 to 2023-24. 3. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete, or rescind all or any of the GROUND OF APPEAL on or before the final hearing, if necessity so arise.” 3. The assessee is engaged into construction/labour activities and has not filed return of income as his income was below the taxable threshold. The Assessing Officer passed order u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act on 08-10-2018 thereby assessing total income at Rs. 21,30,416/- after making addition of Rs. 21,30,416/- u/s. 69A of the Act. 4. The assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee but as per the submissions quoted from page 6-7 of the order of the CIT(A) made by the assessee, we are proceeding with the appeal. The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and order of the CIT(A). 6. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. The assessee in para 4 of his submissions before the CIT(A) has categorically mentioned that the assessee filed return of income declaring following receipts from labour contractor business u/s. 44AD from assessment year 2018-19 to 2023-24 and assessee’s business that of labour construction has never changed throughout these years. The assessee has also given the details of the receipts declared which indicate that the assessee is regularly depositing the cash and withdrawing the same. There is considerable debit Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 2077/Ahd/2025 Maqsudali Makbulali Saiyed, A.Y. 2011-12 3 entries appearing in the bank statement of the assessee. The withdrawal from the bank has been utilized by the assessee either in the form of very investment or the same has been incurred as an expenses related to assessee’s business. Thus, the deposits cannot be held as undisclosed income of assessee u/s. 69A of the Act. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 26-02-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (Dr. BRR Kumar) (Suchitra Kamble) Vice President Judicial Member Ahmedabad : Dated 26/02/2026 a.k. आदेश क\u0006 \u0007\bत ल प अ\u000fे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील\u0012य अ\u0013धकरण, अहमदाबाद Printed from counselvise.com "