KAMLESHBHAI BABUBHAI PATEL ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE - 3(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 521/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 June 2026AY 2020-214 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes, restoring the case to the AO. This was to provide the assessee an opportunity to present their case properly, subject to a cost of Rs. 20,000 to be deposited in the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) which confirmed additions made by the AO under Section 147 r.w.s. 144. The assessee's accountant had left India, leading to improper representation before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to represent their case before the lower authorities due to ex-parte proceedings and whether the additions made were justified without proper consideration of evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250,Section 133(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Gandhi, A.R, Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT. DR
For Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT. DR
Hearing: 22/06/2026Pronounced: 23/06/2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 521/Ahd/2026 (िनधा�रण वष� / Assessment Year : 2020-21) बनाम Kamleshbhai Babubhai The Dy. Commissioner of / Patel Income Tax Vs. 123, Madhvas, Bhadaj, Circle-3(1)(1), Daskroi, Ahmedabad, Ahmedabad Gujarat - 380060 �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ACLPP0143N (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ� ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Suresh Gandhi, A.R. ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Ram Tiwari, CIT. DR

Date of Hearing 22/06/2026 Date of Pronouncement 23/06/2026 (आदेश)/ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

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 16.12.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2020-21.

ITA No.521/Ahd/2026[Kamleshbhai Babubhai Patel vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2020-21 - 2 –

2.

The assessee has taken following grounds in this appeal:

“1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts while confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act without accordingly proper and reasonable opportunity to represent the case with supporting documentary evidences. In view of the fact that the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) has been concluded in a very short time period as well as the assessment order is passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act (i.e. ex parte), the case should be set aside and restore back to the file of the Assessing Officer. 2. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts while confirming the addition of Rs. 18,82,96,863/- made by the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, on account of alleged receipt of total sales consideration on sale of various immovable properties which remained unexplained treating it as long term capital gain without proper appreciation and consideration of the details obtained u/s. 133(6) of the Act. As the appellant has already considered his share in the total sales consideration of each of the properties as detailed in the respective sale deeds, the addition of gross sales consideration based on SFT-12 transactions only amounting to Rs. 18,82,96,863/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is required to be set aside and restore back to the file of the Assessing Officer. 3. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts while confirming the addition of Rs. 4,02,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, on account of alleged receipt of total sales consideration on sale of various immovable properties which remained unexplained treating it as long term capital gain without proper appreciation and consideration of the details obtained u/s. 133(6) of the Act. As the appellant has already considered his share in the total sales consideration of each of the properties as detailed in the respective sale deeds, the addition of gross sales consideration based on SFT-12 transactions only amounting to Rs. 4,02,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) is required to be set aside and restore back to the file of the Assessing Officer.”

3.

At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) to submit that the same is the ex parte order of the Ld. CIT(A).

ITA No.521/Ahd/2026[Kamleshbhai Babubhai Patel vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2020-21 - 3 – 4. He has further invited our attention to the impugned assessment order to submit that the same is also an ex parte / best judgment order passed u/s 144 of the Act.

4.1 The Ld. Counsel has submitted that the Accountant of the assessee who was looking into the matter had left India and, therefore, the matter could not be represented properly before the lower authorities as no coordination could be made with the concerned AR of the assessee. Further, that the then AR of the assessee had not informed the assessee about the status of the hearings before the lower authorities. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted that the assessee has a fair case on merits. He, in this respect, has submitted that in this case, the AO has assessed the income in the hands of the assessee on account of sale of the land, whereas, the transaction in question was carried out by the Developer and that the assessee was only a confirming party and that the assessee had not received any consideration out of the alleged transaction. The Ld. Counsel has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present his case before the Ld. Assessing Officer (in short “the AO”).

5.

Considering the rival submissions, in our view, the interests of justice will be well served, if the assessee be given an opportunity to present his case before the Ld.AO. So far as the negligence on the part of the assessee in not properly representing his case before the lower authorities is concerned, the asessee can

ITA No.521/Ahd/2026[Kamleshbhai Babubhai Patel vs. DCIT] A.Y. 2020-21 - 4 –

be burdened with reasonable costs of Rs.20,000/- to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. The assessee will deposit the aforesaid cost amount within 60 days from the receipt of copy of this order and will produce the proof of such deposit before the Ld.AO. Subject to the fulfilment of the aforesaid condition, the AO will pass the assessment order afresh after giving due opportunity to the assessee.

6.

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

This Order pronounced on 23/06/2026

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 23/06/2026 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� �ितिल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 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 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →