SHRI VICKY RAJESH LALWANI,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(5), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1811/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Vicky Rajesh Lalwani, who did not file a return of income for the Assessment Year 2017-18 despite having significant financial transactions, including cash deposits and bank transactions totaling over Rs. 100,00,000. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) issued several notices under section 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which were not responded to by the assessee. Consequently, the ITO treated the transactions as unexplained income under section 69A of the Act. The assessee's appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was dismissed due to non-response to notices. The Tribunal dismissed the subsequent appeal due to procedural deficiencies and lack of substantive response from the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 102452 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 144; 69A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT And Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shri Vicky Rajesh Lalwani D-433, 4th Floor, Gita Mandir Road, Sumel Business Park-3 Raipur, Ahmedabad-380002 PAN: AHAPL9760F (Appellant) Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(5), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Mohit Balani, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 09-04-2025 Date of pronouncement : 16-04-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 25.04.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the exparte assessment order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18. ITA No: 1811/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 I.T.A No. 1811/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No Shri Vicky Rajesh Lalwani vs. ITO 2 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual has not filed the Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2017-18, whereas he made cash deposit of Rs. 13,50,000/- and bank transaction of Rs.86,48,386/- in three accounts held with Kotak Mahindra Bank, Sarangpur, Ahmedabad. Therefore notice u/s. 142 (1) dated 12-03- 2018 was duly served on the assessee requesting to file the Return of Income for A.Y. 2017-18 on or before 31-03-2018. However the assessee neither filed Return of Income nor replied to the notices. Further notices issued on 12-06-2019, 18-07-2019, 07-08-2019 and 13-08-2019 and final show cause notice issued on 14-11- 2019. None of the notices were replied by the assessee, therefore the Ld. A.O. treated entire transactions in bank accounts are as unexplained income and assessed u/s. 69A of the Act and demanded tax thereon. 3. Aggrieved against the exparte assessment order, statutory appeal was filed within time. However during the appellate proceeding to the hearing notices given on 14-12-2023, 11-01-2024, 26-02-2024 and 08-03-2024, the assessee neither responded to the notices nor sought any adjournments. In the absence of any details, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 4. Aggrieved against the appellate order, assessee is in appeal before us with a delay of 116 days. The assessee filed before us a Notarized Affidavit without furnishing the name, father’s name, age and address but signed by the Notary Public which is reproduced below: I.T.A No. 1811/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No Shri Vicky Rajesh Lalwani vs. ITO 3 5. Further Para 4 of the condonation petition filed by the assessee stated as follows: “4. REASON FOR ALEGED NON APPEARANCE BEFORE AO and CIT(A): In this connection, the Applicant most respectfully submits that the Applicant herein filed explanation as regards the cash deposits before the AO and CIT(A). The copy of acknowledgement of reply is annexed along with this application and marked hereto as Annexure-A. The Applicant thus submits that the passing of the impugned assessment order as well as ex-parte order by CIT(A) is bad, illegal and untenable in the eyes of law.” I.T.A No. 1811/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 Page No Shri Vicky Rajesh Lalwani vs. ITO 4 6. However no such “Annexure-A” is placed on record before us. Since the assessee has not filed the Return of Income in spite of service of notices; no details filed before us and the Notarized Affidavit is also incomplete and invalid in the eyes of law. Therefore we dismiss the appeal in-limine. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 16 -04-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 16/04/2025 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / 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 अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद "