MANSUKH GHELA SAVALIYA,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 1(1), RAJKOT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 807/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 September 2026AY 2016-173 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It set aside the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order, deeming it a violation of natural justice, and restored the matter to the assessing officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed 140 days late due to issues with their previous consultant. The assessee also claimed they could not represent their case before the CIT(A) and that the order was ex-parte, violating natural justice principles.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and whether the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) violated principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

Hearing: 18/06/2026Pronounced: 07/09/2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट । In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Rajkot Bench, Rajkot Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member आयकरअपीलसं/.ITA No. 807/RJT/2026 �नधा�रणवष�/ Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mansukh Ghela Savaliya Income Tax Officer, "Riddhi Siddhi", Gokul Dham Vs. Circle 1(1), Rajkot. Kalwad Road, Jmakandorna. Aaykar Bhavan, Rajkot, Gujarat 360405 Gujarat-360001 PAN No. BSKPS6180G (अपीलाथ�/assessee) (��यथ�/Respondent) : �नधा�रतीक�ओरसे/Assessee by : Shri Digant Kiyada, Ld. AR राज�वक�ओरसे/Revenue by : Shri Anadi Dixit, Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईक�तार�ख/Date of Hearing : 18/06/2026 घोषणाक�तार�ख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/09/2026 ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 16.10.2025, arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 21.05.2023, relevant to the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 140 days. Learned Counsel for the assessee explained the reasons for delay, stating that the appeal notices Ire served on the e-mail id of the old consultant, who in turn, did not inform the assessee about the proceedings going on before the Ld.CIT(A), therefore, because of the mistake of the old tax consultant, the assessee should not be penalized and hence, the delay may be condoned. Therefore, the learned Counsel adverted my attention to the affidavit filed in this regard citing reasons

ITA No.807/RJT/2026 (AY 2016-17) Mansukh Ghela Savaliya for condonation of delay and urged for a benign view and sought condonation of delay of 140 days in filling the appeal before the Tribunal. On the other hand, Ld. DR for the Revenue opposed the prayer of assessee for condonation of delay. A perusal of the affidavit gives me an impression of existence of mitigating circumstances to enable me to exercise my discretion in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the delay is condoned.

3.

On merit, at the outset itself, ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee wants to submit additional documents and evidences before the assessing officer to prove his claim, therefore, ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, another opportunity to contest the appeal before the assessing officer may be granted to the assessee.

4.

On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue did not raise any objection if the matter is restored back to the file of the assessing officer.

5.

I have heard, both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex-parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.

6.

Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the Ld. CIT(A). I note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits

Page 2 of 3

ITA No.807/RJT/2026 (AY 2016-17) Mansukh Ghela Savaliya based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. The assessee has participated in appellate proceedings and sought adjournment during the appellate proceedings to file details and documents, however, Ld. CIT(A) did not allow further time to the assessee. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. I hold and direct accordingly. The assessing officer will afford opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in further evidence to substantiate its case. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the assessing officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.

7.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes Order was pronounced in the open Court on 07/09/2026.

Sd/- [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member राजकोट /Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 07/09/2026 Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File

By Order //True Copy// Private Secretary ITAT, Rajkot

Page 3 of 3

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →