SACHIN NOTIFIED AREA,SURAT V. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1)(1), SURAT

ITA 1047/SRT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Anand Saraf, the appellant, who challenged an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary issue was the rejection of the assessee's claims related to cash receipts and discounts, which were not substantiated with adequate evidence such as books of accounts or transaction details. The Tribunal noted the absence of the assessee's representation during multiple hearings and proceeded ex-parte based on the arguments and materials presented by the Departmental Representative (DR).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 790081 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 06-10-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MUKESH JAIN
• Keywords: Gift

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.1047/SRT/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Anand Saraf B-403, Indradhanush Apt, Citylight, Surat PAN – AGBPS0649E Vs DCIT, Circle -2 Bikaner, Rajasthan (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Mukesh Jain, CIT DR Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 11.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 13.08.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called repeatedly. From the records we noticed that even on the previous date of hearings nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee. Since application for seeking adjournment has been placed on record but keeping in view the conduct of the assessee therefore application for seeking adjournment stands dismissed. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat 3. On the other hand Ld. DR present in the court is ready with the arguments therefore we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte. 4. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material placed on records written submissions and also the orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the records we noticed that Ld. CIT(A) had rejected the claim of the assessee as the assessee could not substantiate his claim with regard to books of accounts / book results and upheld the order of AO. We noticed that the issue in question was dealt in detail by Ld. CIT(A) while passing its order and the operative portion is contained in para 5(ii) to (vi) and the same is reproduced herein below: Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat Printed from counselvise.com 8 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat 5. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the present case and findings of the CIT(A), we are of the view that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing a detailed and well reasoned order. The assessee had not submitted any other corroborative evidence to prove his claim of cash receipts and discount received. Even the copy of gift deed, the details of gift received, cash received from Vijaya Infrastructure and the details of transactions were not submitted. Therefore the CIT(A) rejected the claim of assessee. 6. No new facts or circumstances have been brought before us by the assesseeduring the course of arguments in order to controvert or rebut the findings so recorded by Ld.CIT(A). Therefore we have no reasons to interfere into or deviate from the lawful findings so recorded by Ld. CIT(A). Hence, we uphold the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds raised by the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed with order as to cost. Order pronounced in the open court on 11/11/2025 Sd/- S Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Surat: Dated: 11/11/2025 KRK, Sr. PS. Printed from counselvise.com 9 ITA No. 1047/SRT/2024. Anand Saraf, Surat Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Surat Printed from counselvise.com "