KOMALBEN SURESHKUMAR PANJWANI,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1252/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 July 2026AY 2019-204 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delays in filing the appeals before both the CIT(A) and the ITAT. The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a 7-day delay. The assessee, a senior citizen and retired teacher, explained the delay was due to her husband's demise and her unfamiliarity with tax matters. A further delay of 40 days occurred in filing the appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits. The appeal also concerns the disallowance of deductions under Section 80C and 80D.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 80C,Section 80D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Shah, A.R, Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr. DR
For Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr. DR
Hearing: 30/06/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1252/Ahd/2026 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2019-20)

बनाम Komalben Sureshkumar Income Tax Officer / Panjwani Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad Vs. B/14 Rivera Bunglows, Nr. Avas Park, Nobelnagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 382340 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ABAPN3309A (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ� ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Kalpesh Shah, A.R. ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30/06/2026 06/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement

(आदेश)/ORDER

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), dated 09.12.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019-20.

ITA No.1252/Ahd/2026[Komalben Sureshkumar Panjwani vs. ITO] A.Y. 2019-20 - 2 –

2.

The assessee has taken following grounds in this appeal:

“1. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal in limine without adjudicating the same on merits, merely on account of a delay of 7 days in filing the appeal, which is arbitrary, unjust and contrary to the principles of natural justice. 2. Without prejudice to the above, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing the deduction of ₹1,50,000/- claimed under section 80C of the Act, which was duly supported by genuine investments including Life Insurance Premium, Provident Fund contributions, Postal Life Insurance and Public Provident Fund deposits. 3. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in disallowing the deduction of ₹11,053/- claimed under section 80D of the Act towards medical insurance premium, without properly appreciating the supporting evidence submitted. 4. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the documentary evidence merely on the ground of name variation, without appreciating that the Appellant had legally changed her name through official Gazette notification and that the identity of the Appellant remained the same. 5. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing.”

3.

No-one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee. An application has been filed by one Shri Kalpesh Shah, Chartered Accountant. However, I find that no valid power of attorney has been executed by the assessee in favour of Shri Kalpesh Shah. The unsigned letter of authority has been placed on file.

4.

The appeal is barred by limitation by 40 days. A separate affidavit for condonation of delay has been filed, wherein, the assessee has stated that she is senior citizen and retired Government School Teacher and being an old lady, her income tax matters were used to be looked into by her deceased husband.

ITA No.1252/Ahd/2026[Komalben Sureshkumar Panjwani vs. ITO] A.Y. 2019-20 - 3 –

After the demise of her husband, she was left unawares of the complexities of taxation matters and legal proceedings and, therefore, could not properly looked into the assessment proceedings. She was not aware of the passing of the assessment order, however, when she received demand notice, only then she became aware of the passing of the assessment order and, thereafter, immediately filed appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), however, due to aforesaid circumstances, the delay of 7 days occurred in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) resulting into passing of the order of the Ld.CIT(A) dismissing the appeal of the assessee in the limine holding the same as barred by limitation. However, the assessee was not aware of the dismissal of the appeal in limine by the Ld.CIT(A) and when the assessee enquired about the matter, the limitation period for filing the appeal before this Tribunal had already stood expired resulting into the delay of 40 days in filing of the present appeal.

5.

Considering the above submissions, in my view, the interests of justice will be well served, if the assessee be given an opportunity to present her case before the Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO’). Therefore, the delay of 7 days in filing of the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) is, hereby, condoned and the delay in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal is also, hereby, condoned. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside and the matter is restored o the file of the AO for de novo assessment. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer will give

ITA No.1252/Ahd/2026[Komalben Sureshkumar Panjwani vs. ITO] A.Y. 2019-20 - 4 –

proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present her case and, thereafter, to pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with law. The assessee will also remain vigilant and present her case before the AO as and when required by the AO.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

This Order pronounced on 06/07/2026

/- Sd/- (SANJAY GARG) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 06/07/2026 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 3. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. 5. �वभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad गाड� फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad

More judgments on Section 80C

All 658 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →