RAJESHBHAI PARSOTTAMDAS PATEL,VADODARA V. THE ITO, WARD-4(1)(2), VADODARA

ITA 429/AHD/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Rajeshbhai Parsottamdas Patel against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) and the Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward-4(1)(2), Vadodara, concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention revolves around the addition of Rs. 12,50,000 as undisclosed income, which the assessee deposited during the demonetization period. The Assessing Officer initially made this addition under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, considering it undisclosed income. The CIT(A) upheld this decision, leading to the current appeal. The assessee argued that the deposits were from his own past savings and withdrawals, and contested the computation of total income and the initiation of penalty proceedings under sections 271AAC and interest under section 234B of the Act. The tribunal noted procedural inadequacies in the handling of the assessee's submissions and remanded the case for a thorough re-examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 834426 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMESHWAR P. MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: SANKET BAKSHI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 234B

Judgement Text

"THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD Before Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Rajeshbhai Parsottamdas Patel, 1 Darvaja Faliyu, At & Post: Noida , Tal: Dabhoi, Dist: Vadodara-391210 PAN: ADIPP0626L (Appellant) Vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(2), Vadodara-390007 (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Sanket Bakshi, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 02-02-2026 Date of pronouncement : 04-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER This is an appeal filed against the order dated 04-10- 2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), for assessment year 2017-18. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:- “All the grounds of appeal in this appeal are mutually exclusive and without prejudice to each other. 1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC (\"the CIT(A)\"] and the learned Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(2) (\"the AO\"), Baroda erred in fact and in law in considering deposit of Rs.12,50,000/- as undisclosed income and making addition of the same. 2. The learned CIT(A) and the learned AO erred in fact and in law in computing the total income at Rs.14,28,840/- without ITA No. 429/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-18 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 429/Ahd/2025 Rajeshbhai Parsottamdas Patel, A.Y. 2017-18 2 considering the fact that the amount deposited was from Assessee's own past savings and withdrawals. 3. Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) and the learned AO erred in fact and in law in making the addition of the gross deposits instead of the net deposits. 4. The learned CIT(A) and the learned AO erred in fact and in law in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC of the Act. 5. The learned CIT(A) and the learned AO erred in fact and in law in charging interest u/s 234B of the Act. 6. The Appellant craves the right to add, to alter, to substitute, delete or modify all or any of the above grounds of Appeal.” 3. The assessee filed return of income on 25-07-2017 declaring total income at Rs. 1,78,830/-. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act issued on 14-08-2018. In response to the notice, assessee submitted the reply and after considering the same, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee deposited 12,50,000/- during the demonetization period in his bank account. The Assessing Officer made addition of 12,50,000/- u/s. 69A on account of undisclosed income. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The ld. A.R. submitted that there is a delay of 56 days, the delay is condoned. 6. The ld. A.R. further submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances, the assessee could not file the details before Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 429/Ahd/2025 Rajeshbhai Parsottamdas Patel, A.Y. 2017-18 3 the A.O. as well as before the CIT(A). Therefore, the ld. A.R. requested that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper verification and adjudication of the issues. 7. The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 8. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials on record. It is pertinent to note that the Assessing Officer has issued only one notice and has not stated anywhere in the assessment order that the assessee was served with the notice. Beside this, the assessee was not given adequate time to file the details by the CIT(A). Therefore, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for verifying the documents/evidences to be filed before the Assessing Officer and adjudicate the issues as per Income Tax Act. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 04-02-2026 Sd/- (Suchitra Kamble) Judicial Member a.k. Ahmedabad : Dated 04/02/2026 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 429/Ahd/2025 Rajeshbhai Parsottamdas Patel, A.Y. 2017-18 4 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 "