DIPENBHAI VAGHELA,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 1102/RJT/2026Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 October 2026AY 2024-253 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) was an ex-parte and non-speaking order, and that the assessee had not been given a sufficient opportunity of being heard, constituting a violation of the principle of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal on account of a 60-day delay, but the assessee had explained a sufficient cause for this delay, which the Tribunal condoned. The Tribunal observed that the assessee had sought adjournments before the Ld. CIT(A) to file details and documents, but these were not allowed. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication. The AO was directed to pass a speaking order after affording a sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who was also directed to contest their stand forthwith and was at liberty to submit further evidence. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside and the matter was remitted back to the AO for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Shri Dipenbhai Vaghela, proprietor of Manpasand Dresses, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Rajkot Bench, against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [NFAC/Ld.CIT(A)] dated 17.06.2026. This order arose from an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under sections 144 read with 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, dated 23.03.2026. The assessee's appeal pertains to Assessment Year 2013-14. The assessee's primary contention was that the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) order was ex-parte and vitiated due to a violation of the principle of natural justice, as the assessee was not afforded a proper opportunity to represent their case and intended to file additional documents.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the ex-parte order passed by the NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) is vitiated due to a violation of the principle of natural justice, thereby requiring a fresh adjudication? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961). Assessee's Contentions: The assessee argued that the impugned order was ex-parte and thus vitiated due to a violation of the principle of natural justice. The assessee contended that they could not represent their case effectively before the Ld. CIT(A) and sought another opportunity to contest the appeal before the AO, intending to submit additional documents and evidence. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue's Ld. DR did not raise any objection to the matter being restored back to the file of the AO.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”

Before: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Ranpura, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh Iyer, Ld. Sr. DR
Hearing: 01/10/2026

Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM:

Captioned appeal filed by the Assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2013-14, 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/Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 17.06.2026, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 read with section 144B of the Act, dated 23.03.2026. 2. At the outs

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 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →