THAKORBHAI JAGDISHBHAI PATEL,PANCHMAHALS, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GODHRA, PANCHMAHALS

ITA 1248/AHD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 September 2026AY 2020-215 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

The assessee, Thakorbhai Jagdishbhai Patel, filed an appeal against the order dated 02.01.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for Assessment Year 2020-21. The appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed in limine due to a delay of 181 days. The assessee contended that the delay occurred because the person deputed to file the appeal failed to do so, and this fact only came to the assessee's knowledge in July 2025. It was also noted that there was no effective representation by the assessee before the Assessing Officer (AO) or the Ld. CIT(A), and the additions were not decided on merits. The deceased Jagdishbhai Patel's legal heir is the current assessee.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) by applying the principle laid down in Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Ors. vs. Katiji and Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), considering the death of Jagdishbhai Patel and the subsequent management of the case by his legal heir, along with the fact that the assessee was unaware of the appeal not being filed. The Tribunal held that the interests of justice would be served by giving the assessee an opportunity to present his case before the AO. The assessee was directed to deposit Rs. 10,000/- in the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund as a cost for the negligence in representing the case before the lower authorities. Subject to this condition, the delay was condoned, the impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the file of the AO for passing a fresh assessment order after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee was directed to submit all relevant materials and comply with notices without seeking unnecessary adjournments. The Tribunal expressly left undecided the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee, including the additions, TDS, interest, and penalty proceedings, as these were to be adjudicated by the AO.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine on the technical count of delay without entering into the merits of the case, thereby violating principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the action of the AO in reopening the assessment under Section 147 of the Act was justified? 3. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not deleting the addition of Rs. 1,75,26,112/- made in respect of addition under Section 69A? 4. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not deleting the addition? 5. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the entire commission income of Rs. 5,56,580/- cannot be taxed without deducting TDS? 6. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not allowing TDS credit of Rs. 20,725/-? 7. Whether both the AO and CIT(A) erred in passing impugned orders without properly appreciating facts, submissions, and documentary evidence, violating principles of natural justice? 8. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Sections 234A/234B of the Act? 9. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the initiation of penalty proceedings under Sections 270A/271A/271B/271AAC(1)/272A(1)(d) of the Act? Assessee's contentions: The Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on delay without considering the merits. The delay was due to the negligence of the deputed person. The AO's action under Section 147 was unjustified. Additions under Section 69A and other additions should be deleted. Commission income should not be taxed without TDS deduction, and TDS credit should be allowed. Orders were passed in violation of natural justice. Interest under Sections 234A/234B and penalty proceedings under various sections were wrongly confirmed. Revenue's contentions: Not recorded in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144,Section 69A,Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 270A,Section 271A,Section 271B,Section 271AAC(1),Section 272A(1)(d)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD BENCHES, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY KUMAR & SHRI GANGADHAR PANDA

Pronounced: 30.09.2026

PER SANJAY KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

- This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 02.01.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld. CIT (A)’ in short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’ in short) for Assessmen

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 48,773 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →