SHIVJIBHAI JADVABHAI KERAI,KUTCH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHUJ

PDF · subscribers
ITA 340/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot15 May 2026AY 2016-20172 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the appeals for AY 2014-15 were dismissed by the CIT(A) on grounds of delay. The judgment does not specify the outcome for AY 2016-17 or the specific reasoning for the dismissal of the AY 2014-15 appeals beyond the delay.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed multiple appeals before the ITAT concerning assessment years 2014-15 and 2016-17. These appeals challenged reassessment orders and penalty orders passed by the Assessing Officer. The lower appellate authority (CIT(A)) dismissed the assessee's appeals for AY 2014-15 due to delay.

What were the issues?

The primary issues raised by the assessee concerned the validity of reassessment orders and the approval process under Section 151. However, the appeals were dismissed by the lower authority due to delay.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 271(1)(c),Section 271(1)(b),Section 151

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 26/03/2026Pronounced: 15/05/2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट। In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Rajkot Bench, Rajkot Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 284 & 336 to 340/Rjt/2026 िनधा�रण वष� /Assessment Year: (2014-15 & 2016-17) Shivjibhai Jadavbhai Kerai, बनाम/ Income Tax Officer Rampar, Vekara, Ward-4, Gandhidham, Vs. Kutch Gujarat - 370445. Bhuj-2, Bhuj. �ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: CCSPK2561G (Assessee) (Respondent) िनधा�रती की ओर से/Assessee by : Shri R. B. Shah, AR राज� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26/03/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 15/05/2026 आदेश /ORDER Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: Captioned six appeals filed by the same assessee, pertaining to assessment years (AY) 2014-15 and 2016-17, are directed against the separate orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [‘NFAC’], which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer under section 147/144 of the Act and separate penalty orders passed by the Assessing Officer under sections 271(1) (c ) and 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act 1961.

2.

For assessment year 2014-15, the assessee filed the quantum appeal in ITA No.336/Rjt/2026, wherein the assessee has raised two legal issues, viz: (i) that reassessment order passed u/s 147 of the Act dated 29.03.2022, is bad in law and (ii) the approval taken u/s 151 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is

ITA No. 284 and 336-340/Rjt/2026 (AY 2014-15 & 2016-17 Shivjibhai Jadavbhai Kerai v. ITO

mechanical and without application of mind. In the same assessment year, that is, assessment year 2014-15, the Assessing Officer imposed the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.12,74,087/- vide assessee’s appeal in ITA No.337/Rjt/2026, and the assessee has also filed the appeal for assessment year 2014-15 against the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act to the tune of Rs.40,000/-. In all these appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15, the lower authority, that is, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeals of the assessee on account of delay.

3.

For assessment year 2016-17, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal, in ITA No.284/Rjt/2026, (quantum appeal) wherein the assessee has raised two legal issues, stating that: (i) reassessment order framed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act dated 27.03.2022, is bad in law and (ii) approval given u/s 151 of the Income Tax Act 1961, is mechanical and without application of mind. The assessee has also filed the appeal before this Tribunal against the penalty order u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, vide ITA No.339/Rjt/2026 for assessment year 2016-17, wherein the Assessing Officer has imposed the penalty on the assessee to the tune of Rs.3,16,849/-. For assessment year 2016- 17, the assessee has also filed the appeal before this Tribunal in ITA No.340/Rjt/2026, wherein the Assessing Officer has imposed the penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act to the tune of Rs.50,000/-.

4.

For assessment year 2014-15, the assessee filed quantum appeal in ITA No.336/Rjt/2026 and the penalty appeal u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act, in ITA No.337/Rjt/2026 and the penalty appeal u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act, in ITA No.338/Rjt/2026. All these three appeals were barred by limitation ( time barred) before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed these appeals of the assessee on account of delay. The details of delay, appeal-wise are as follows:

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →