JILABHAI DHARABHAI GOLTAR,SURENDRANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 402/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 May 2026AY 2020-213 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte and non-speaking, violating natural justice. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication after providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte. The assessee contended that they were not given a proper opportunity to represent their case, violating the principles of natural justice.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) violated the principles of natural justice and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Pinal Raval, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 07/04/2026

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट। In The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (SMC) Rajkot Bench, Rajkot Before Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 402/Rjt/2026 (िनधा�रणवष�/Assessment Year: (2020-21) Jilabhai Dharabhai Goltar, Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, 1st Floor, White House, Opp. Sabji Market, Vs. Irish Building, Opp. Mela Medan, Main Road, Surendranagar, 363001 Surendranagar, 363001. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AJKPG7325H (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Pinal Raval, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Gopi Nath Chaubey, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 07/04/2026 : 08/05/2026 Date of Pronouncement

ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:

Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2020-21, 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/ CIT(A)’], dated 20.02.2026, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 of the Act, dated 24.03.2025.

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) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle

ITA No. 402/Rjt/2026 Jilabhai D. Goltar

of natural justice. The 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.

I 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. I 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, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I 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. I 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, I restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer for de novo 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. I hold and direct

Page 2 of 3

ITA No. 402/Rjt/2026 Jilabhai D. Goltar

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, I 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 08/05/2026.

Sd/- (Dr. Arjun Lal Saini) लेखा सद�य/Accountant Member राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 08/05/2026 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// Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS 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 →