MR LALCHAND SHANKARLAL SHARMA,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 1(4), MUMBAI

ITA 6269/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Lalchand Shankarlal Sharma, who appealed against an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning an assessment under sections 143(3) read with section 144C of the Income Tax Act. The primary contention was the addition of Rs. 4,13,18,753 to the capital account, which the assessee argued was due to misaccounted transactions and not indicative of undisclosed income. The assessee faced health issues that prevented him from adequately responding during the initial assessment and appellate proceedings. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the lack of objection from the Revenue, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a detailed examination of the newly submitted documents and a fair reassessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 832230 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDRA MOHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: NEELKANTH KHANDELWAL

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘A’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.6269/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year :2014-15) Mr. Lalchand Shankarlal Sharma Row House No.10, Flower Valley Complex CHS, Opp. Viviana Mall Eastern Express Highway Thane (W), Maharashtra- 400 601 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Thane PAN/GIR No.BCNPS2755L (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal, Virtually appear Revenue by Shri Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 08/09/2025 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 144C. 2. The assessee is merely aggrieved by addition of Rs. 4,13,18,753/- being increase to the capital account. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6269/Mum/2025 Lalchand Shankarlal Sharma 2 3. Facts in brief are that here in this case, addition has been made on account of increase in capital account for the year under reference and assessee has submitted that he has been in and out of hospitals for past ten years due to several ailments. This has also caused severe mental and emotional distress. As such, he could not appear before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings and was also unable to appropriately present the case before the ld. CIT(A) and could not explain about the nature and source of the increase in capital except for giving the following note: 1. Payment made for Shirdi Hotel of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- was shown as addition in capital. 2. Payment for the Shirde Property of Rs.3,47,00,000/- was made business accounts. In FY lalchand Sharma had made payment of Rs.1,00,00,000/- in FY 12-13 which was not accounted in same year. Due to non-accounting of entries in FY 12-13 assessee booked such payment In FY 13-14 through Capital. For reference we enclosed copy of Ledger with Payment Details. 3. Assessee regularly provide services to Vodafone India Ltd. In FY 12-13 due to Non receipt of record from assessee on time outstanding balance Debtors) not shown in balance sheet for the AY 2013-14 That debtors balance shown in FY 2013-14 through introduction of Capital. Assessee booked all sales made with Vodafone India Ltd, there was no concealment of income in FY 12-13.” 4. Ld. CIT(A) required assessee to provide following documents:-  The Appellant assessee has not provided its Bank Statements to this appellate authority  The Appellant assessee has not provided the purchase deed of the property Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6269/Mum/2025 Lalchand Shankarlal Sharma 3  No Audited Financials have been provided by the appellant assessee.  No Source of the payment made for the purchase of property has been provided by the appellant assessee. 5. However, there was no reply submitted by the assessee and accordingly ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in want of any proper explanation. Before us ld. Counsel submitted that due to some urgent personal reasons and exigencies assessee could not provide these documents at that point of time and now all these documents are now available with assessee which he wants to furnish. In the interest of justice, he has prayed that the matter may be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) after considering these documents and decide the appeal on merits. 6. Ld. DR also does not have any objection if the matter is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we restore this issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to consider these evidences and explanation and decide the appeal on merits after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced on 21st January, 2026. Sd/- (MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 21/01/2026 KARUNA, sr.ps Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.6269/Mum/2025 Lalchand Shankarlal Sharma 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// Printed from counselvise.com "