BHARATBHAI ARJANBHAI VALA,KODINAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4 VERAVAL, VERAVAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 755/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 July 2026AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution as the assessee failed to appear before the Assessing Officer, CIT(A), and the Tribunal itself. The Tribunal noted the assessee's habitual default and lack of interest in pursuing the appeal.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer initiated reassessment proceedings under Section 147 after receiving information about the assessee's cash deposits of Rs. 33,01,000/-. The assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations or comply with notices, leading to the cash being treated as unexplained income.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to the assessee's failure to prosecute the case and appear before the appellate authorities. The primary issue is the lack of representation and compliance by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 250,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

For Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 13/07/2026Pronounced: 15/07/2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट। In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member And Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member

आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 755/RJT/2026 [ �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2011-12 ] Bharatbhai Arjanbhai Vala The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 4 Sarakhadi, Kodinar, Veraval-362265, Gujarat Vs. Junagadh-362720, Gujarat �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ALJPV5187K (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 13/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 15/07/2026

:: ORDER :: Per, Shri Sonjoy Sarma, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2011-12, is directed against the order under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short ‘NFAC’], dated 07.02.2024, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 07.12.2018.

2.

The brief facts of the case are that information was received by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs.33,01,000/- during the relevant assessment year. Since no return of income had been filed by the assessee,

ITA No.755/RJT/2026 Bharatbhai A. Vala proceedings under section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 were initiated by issuing a notice under section 148 of the Act. As the assessee failed to furnish a satisfactory explanation in respect of the cash deposits and did not effectively comply with the statutory notices, the Assessing Officer completed the reassessment by treating the cash deposits of Rs.33,01,000/- as unexplained and assessed the total income accordingly.

3.

Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). However, despite seven consecutive opportunities of hearing, the assessee failed to appear. Consequently, the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte and confirmed the assessment order.

4.

The present appeal before the Tribunal has been filed with a delay of 743 days. An application for condonation of delay has been filed stating various reasons for the delay. However, when the appeal was called for hearing before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee. The matter was called out more than once, but there was no representation. Even the notice issued by the Registry fixing the appeal for hearing remained uncomplied with, and no request for adjournment was received.

5.

We have considered the material available on record. It is evident that the assessee has been a habitual defaulter. The assessee failed to prosecute the matter before the Assessing Officer as well as before the learned CIT(A). Even before this Tribunal, despite due notice, the assessee has chosen not to appear or prosecute the appeal. In these circumstances, it is clear that the assessee is not interested in pursuing the present appeal. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution. Nevertheless, it is made clear that if the assessee is able to show

Page 2 of 3

ITA No.755/RJT/2026 Bharatbhai A. Vala sufficient cause for the non-appearance and files an appropriate application for recall in accordance with law, the same shall be considered on its own merits.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 15th day of July, 2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] [ Shri Sonjoy Sarma ] लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member �याियक सद�य/Judicial Member राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 15/07/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By order //True Copy// Sr. 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 →