FENILKUMAR DIPAKBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO,WARD-2(3)(4),SURAT, SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 482/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Surat06 July 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and violated the principles of natural justice as the assessee was not afforded sufficient opportunity of being heard. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal against the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order was heard. The assessee contended that they were not given a proper opportunity to represent their case before the CIT(A) and sought to submit additional documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)'s order was vitiated due to violation of the principle of natural justice and lack of opportunity to the assessee to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat Bench, Surat

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 27/04/2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, सूरत �यायपीठ, सूरत । In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Surat Bench, Surat Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member And Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 482/SRT/2025 [ �नधा�रण वष�/Assessment Year: 2017-18 ] Fenilkumar Dipakbhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, New Padar Faliyu, Saniya Ward-2(3)(4), Surat, Vs. Kanade, Taluka : Choriyasi, Aayakar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Dist : Surat-394210(Guj.) Surat, Gujarat 395002 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: BHUPP7674M (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent)

Appellant by : Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Ajay Uke, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27/04/2026 06/07/2026 Date of Pronouncement : ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:

Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2017-18, 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 (NAC) Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short ‘NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 29.03.2023, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act, dated 10.12.2019. 2. At the outset itself, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A)

ITA No. 482/SRT/2025 Fenilkumar Dipakbhai

and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. Since, the assessee wants to submit additional documents and evidences before the assessing officer, 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.

3.

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.

4.

We 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. We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 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. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the Ld. CIT(A). We note that the Ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits 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. We 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, we restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer for de novo

Page 2 of 3

ITA No. 482/SRT/2025 Fenilkumar Dipakbhai

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. We 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, we 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.

5.

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

Order is pronounced in the open court on 06/07/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- [ Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar ] [ Dr. Arjun Lal Saini ] �याियक सद�य/Judicial Member लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member //True Copy// राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 06/07/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Surat 6. Guard File By order

Sr. Private Secretary ITAT, Surat

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 →