VIMALKUMAR PRAKASHCHANDRA JAIN,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1651/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vimalkumar Prakashchandra Jain, the appellant, who contested the addition of Rs. 2.47 crores to his income, deemed as unexplained money under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, related to the Assessment Year 2018-19. The addition was initially made by the Assessing Officer (A.O.) following a reassessment order under sections 147 and 144 of the Act, after the assessee partially responded to a notice regarding the introduction of share capital in the partnership firm M/s. Vrundavan Corporation. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld this addition, leading to the current appeal. The Tribunal noted that the additional evidence provided by the assessee was not considered by the CIT(A), warranting a remand to the A.O. for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783301 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 28-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence; Principle of natural justice; Deemed to accrue or arise in india
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Vimalkumar Prakashchandra Jain Kalptaru Traders Nr. New Rest House, Kalikund Kheda Road, At. Dholka-382225 PAN: ADPPJ5329M (Appellant) Vs The ITO, WArd-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri S.N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, A.Rs. Revenue Represented: Shri Saresa Kartik Laxmanbhai, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 06-11-2025 Date of pronouncement : 07-11-2025 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the appellate order dated 04.07.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19. ITA No. 1651/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year. 2018-19 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1651/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Page No Vimalkumar Prakashchandra Jain vs. ITO 2 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is an individual derived income from Proprietary business of Kalptaru Traders, share from Partnership Firms and other income. For the Asst. Year 2018-19, assessee filed his Return of Income on 18-10-2018 declaring total income of Rs. 6,93,710/-. Later on information received that the assessee one of the Partner in the Firm M/s. Vrundavan Corporation wherein he had introduced the share capital of Rs. 2.47 crores during the financial year 2017-18 relating to the assessment year 2018-19. Hence a notice u/s 148 was issued on 08-04-2022. The assessee partly response to the notice which has resulted in passing ex-parte assessment order and treating the introduction of share capital as unexplained and deemed income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act and demanded tax thereon. 3. Aggrieved against the same, assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the assessee produced the investment made in M/s. Vrundavan Corporation from his personal books of account, with cheque numbers and bank details. The assessee also produced confirmation of unsecured loan shown in his personal books with PAN and ITR. Further all credit entries were through bank cheques and recorded in the personal books of the assessee and then transferred to the firm M/s. Vrundavan Corporation. Therefore the addition made by the A.O. is not sustainable and requested to delete the same. The assessee also filed additional documents invoking Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules before Ld. CIT(A). However Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition on the basis that the creditworthiness of the creditors not discharged. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1651/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Page No Vimalkumar Prakashchandra Jain vs. ITO 3 4. Aggrieved against the appellate order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1.1 The order passed by U/s. 250 passed on 04.07.2025 for A.Y. 2018-19 by NFAC, CIT(A)], Delhi (for short CITIA)\" upholding the addition of Rs.2,47,00,000/- made by A.O. towards the share capital introduced in the partnership firm of M/s. Vrundavan Corporation as unexplained money is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 2.1 The ld. CITIA) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not considering fully and properly the explanation given as well as evidence produced in respect of the impugned addition of Rs. 2,47,00,000/-. Thus, there was a gross violation of the principles of natural justice. 3.1 The ld. CITIA) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding the addition of Rs.2.47,00,000/- made by A.Ο. towards the share capital introduced in the partnership firm of M/s. Vrundavan Corporation as unexplained money 3.2 That the in the facts and circumstances of the ld. CIT(A), ought not to have upheld the addition of Rs.2,47,00,000/- made by. A.O. towards the share capital introduced in the partnership firm of M/s. Vrundavan Corporation as unexplained money. It is, therefore, prayed that the addition of Rs. 2,47,00,000/- upheld by the CIT(A) may kindly be deleted. 5. Ld. Sr. Counsel Shri S.N. Divatia appearing for the assessee submitted before us that detailed explanation in response to the show cause notice dated 20-02-2024 was filed before the assessing officer, explaining the capital introduced by way of cheques and all credit entries duly reflected in assessee’s personal books of accounts and copy of the personal Balance Sheet, ledger account and bank statements furnished before A.O. However the same was not considered by the lower authorities. Further Ld. Counsel demonstrated that the details of loans received from M/s. Kalptaru Developers, M/s. Srinath Developers wherein he is one of the Partner and the same is adjusted against the profit and opening Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1651/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Page No Vimalkumar Prakashchandra Jain vs. ITO 4 balance. The assessee also furnished PAN, ITR and Contra Ledger account of M/s. Padmavati Corporation, M/s. Kalpesh Prakashchandra Jain wherein the loan is repaid through banking channels. Thus the addition made by the lower authorities are liable to be set-aside considering the additional documents filed invoking Rule 46A. 6. Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue supported the assessment order being an exparte and accepted that the additional documents filed before Ld. CIT(A) is also not verified by Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, it is a fit case to remit the matter back to the file of assessing officer to pass fresh order on merits. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. As it can be seen from the Page No. 19 & 20 of the Paper Book which is a written submission filed by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A) to entertain new documents invoking Rule 46A of the I.T. Rules. Further perusal of the appellate order, Ld. CIT(A) has not taken into account the submissions made by the assessee as well as not entertained the additional evidences filed by the assessee. Therefore in the interest of Principal of Natural Justice, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to look into the matter afresh by giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and pass fresh order in accordance with the provisions of law. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1651/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Page No Vimalkumar Prakashchandra Jain vs. ITO 5 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 07-11-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 07/11/2025 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 Printed from counselvise.com "