What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal admitted additional evidence filed by the assessee and found the delay in filing to be genuine. The matter was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for proper verification of the evidences and adjudication on merit.

The assessee, a legal practitioner and agriculturist, had cash deposits of Rs. 11,18,512/- in his bank account. The Assessing Officer passed an ex parte assessment under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without proper verification of evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte assessment passed under Section 144 was justified without proper verification of evidence and whether additional evidence should be admitted.

Rohitkumar Pravinchandra Barot… vs ITO | ITAT Ahmedabad 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER

This is an appeal filed against the order dated 30-11- 2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 2012-13.

The grounds of appeal are as under:- “1 The learned assessing officer has passed ex parte assessment u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 without any proper and sufficient reasons. 2 The ex parte assessment passed u/s 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 is not Justifiable or not tenable. 3 Your petitioner therefore prays that the addition made of Rs.11,18,512/- may be deleted.

I.T.A No. 2504/Ahd/2025 Rohitkumar Pravinchandra Barot, A.Y. 2012-13

4 That the appellate craves leaves to add to alter, amend, modify, substitute, delete and/or all or any of the grounds of appeal on or before the final hearing, if necessity so arises.”

The assessee is a legal practitioner since couple of time and also agriculturist having agriculture land at Jangral Tal. Patan. He is regular assessee & has filed return of income for A.Y. 2012-2013 on dated 09/01/2013 with total income at Rs.1,89,880/-. The cash deposit in bank a/c received on sale of agriculture products loan from his mother & crop loan from bank at Rs.11,18,512/-. The assessing officer has passed ex parte assessment u/s 144 of the I.T. Act 1961.

The ld. A.R. submitted that the assessee has filed the additional evidences along with the condonation of delay application to condone the delay of 319 days. From the perusal of the affidavit of the assessee, it appears that the reason for delay is genuine, hence the delay is condoned.

I have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the issue related to undisclosed income being cash deposits which is added by the Assessing Officer needs to be verified as both assessment order as well as the order of the CIT(A) has not gone through the evidences. The additional evidences filed before the Tribunal is admitted. The matter is remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper verification of the evidences and adjudicate the issue on merit. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.

I.T.A No. 2504/Ahd/2025 Rohitkumar Pravinchandra Barot, A.Y. 2012-13

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 16-04-2026

Sd/- (Suchitra Kamble) Judicial Member

Ahmedabad : Dated 16/04/2026 a.k. आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद

ROHITKUMAR PRAVINCHANDRA BAROT,PATAN vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, PATAN

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments