GUNJAN JAYSUKHBHAI DHOLARIYA,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 3(2)(1), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 643/SRT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 June 2026AY 2018-196 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, citing sufficient cause and the principle of substantial justice. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, with directions for the assessee to ensure compliance.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was delayed by 84 days. The assessment was completed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices, allegedly due to an email mismatch. The first appellate authority also dismissed the appeal ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is justifiable and whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders should be set aside to provide the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 142(1),Section 253(5)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

For Appellant: Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 18.06.2026Pronounced: 25.06.2026

आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण,सूरतन्यायपीठ,सूरत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.643/SRT/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) Gunjan Jaysukhbhai Income Tax Officer Dholariya Ward-3(2)(1), Surat 47, Hariom Society, बनाम/ B/H Ugam Appartment, Vs. A.K. Road, Surat-395008 Gujarat (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) PAN: CAPPD7611F Assessee by Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA Revenue by Shri Ashish Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 18.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement 25.06.2026 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by the order of first-appeal dated 31.01.2025 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“Ld. CIT(A)”], which in turn arises out of the assessment-order dated 23.02.2024 passed by learned Assessment Unit of Income-tax Department [“Ld. AO”] u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 & 144B of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2018-19, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).

2.

The registry has informed that the present appeal is delayed by 84 days and therefore time-barred. The assessee has filed an application/

Page 1 of 6

Gunjan Jaysukhbhai Dholariya ITA No. 643/SRT/2025 - AY 2018-19 affidavit for condonation of delay; the same is scanned and re-produced for an immediate reference:

3.

The averments made by assessee in above application, which are self- explanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed and the Ld.

Page 2 of 6

Gunjan Jaysukhbhai Dholariya ITA No. 643/SRT/2025 - AY 2018-19 DR for revenue does not have any objection if the bench condones delay and accordingly left it to the wisdom of bench. We have considered the explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or material on record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for delay in filing present appeal. We find that section 253(5) of the Act empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time. It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387 that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting a justice-oriented approach. Thus, taking into account the facts of case, the provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.

4.

The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee-individual filed original return of AY 2018-19 declaring a total income of Rs. 2,50,330/- which was assessed. Subsequently, on the basis of information received from INSIGHT Portal of Income-tax Department, the Ld. AO formed a belief that an income of Rs. 8,31,80,581/- chargeable to tax had escapement assessment. Accordingly, the AO issued notice dated 26.04.2022 u/s 148 to assessee in order frame re-assessment u/s 147. The AO also issued notices u/s 142(1) and show-cause notice. But all notices

Page 3 of 6

Gunjan Jaysukhbhai Dholariya ITA No. 643/SRT/2025 - AY 2018-19 issued by AO remained uncompiled with by assessee. Ultimately, the AO completed assessment u/s 144 after making certain additions and thereby re-assessing total income at Rs. 8,21,40,189/-. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal but could not make representation except seeking adjournment. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed assessee’s appeal and upheld AO’s order without granting any relief. Now, the assessee has come in next appeal before us.

5.

Ld. AR for assessee submitted that in present case, the orders passed by lower-authorities are ex-parte. He submitted that the notices sent by Ld. AO during assessment-proceedings did not reach to assessee due to e-mail mis-match. In so far as the proceeding of first-appeal are concerned, the Ld. CIT(A) fixed three hearings (on 29.07.2024, 06.08.2024 and 30.01.2025) and the assessee filed application on 06.08.2024 seeking adjournment which the Ld. CIT(A) granted but the next hearing was fixed on 30.01.2025 after a gap of about 6 months and therefore the assessee could not keep track and could not represent. Ld. AR submitted that the reason of non-compliances is bonafide. He submitted that the assessee is having in his possession, all relevant details and documents and ready to make an effective representation before Ld. AO. He prayed that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity be given to assessee by way of restoring this matter at the level of Ld. AO. He acknowledged that the assessee shall definitely make a proper and effective representation before Ld. AO.

Page 4 of 6

Gunjan Jaysukhbhai Dholariya ITA No. 643/SRT/2025 - AY 2018-19 6. The Ld. DR for revenue, though not opposing the prayer of the assessee for restoration, submitted that the assessee had remained non- compliant during the assessment proceedings as well as proceedings of first- appeal, which constrained the lower authorities to pass ex-parte orders. It was, therefore, submitted that while restoring the matter, appropriate directions may be issued to ensure strict compliance by the assessee.

7.

In view of above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of Ld. AO, we restore this matter to the file of Ld. AO for adjudication afresh, at the risk and responsibility of assessee. The Ld. AO shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by Ld. AO without seeking unnecessary adjournments failing which the Ld. AO shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

8.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open court on 25/06/2026

Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Surat True Copy दिन ांक /Dated : 25/06/2026

Page 5 of 6

Gunjan Jaysukhbhai Dholariya ITA No. 643/SRT/2025 - AY 2018-19 Rajesh/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order

UE COPYAssistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Surat Bench, Surat

Page 6 of 6

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →