RAMNIKLAL MAFATLAL MAKWANA,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA No. 2635/AHD/2026, AY-2014-15 Ramniklal M Makwana - 2–

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual who, along with another person, sold an immovable property during FY 2013-14 relevant to AY 2014-15 for a sale consideration of ₹29,90,000. However, the Stamp Valuation Authority determined the stamp duty value of the property at ₹2,57,99,625, resulting in a difference of ₹2,28,09,625 between the sale consideration and the stamp duty value. Since both co-owners held a 50% share in the property, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee had declared a lower sale consideration, attracting the provisions of section 50C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee, followed by notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the AO completed the assessment under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act, vide order dated 26.03.2022, determining the total income at ₹1,19,81,820. 3. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, the Ld. CIT(A), vide order dated 29.01.2026, dismissed the appeal on the ground that it had been filed beyond the prescribed time limit and that the assessee had failed to establish sufficient cause for condonation of the delay.

Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee had filed an affidavit explaining that the delay in filing the appeal was neither Ramniklal M Makwana - 3– intentional nor deliberate. It was submitted that the impugned order dated 29.01.2026, along with the electronic communication thereof, had been delivered to the assessee’s erstwhile consultant and could not subsequently be traced. Consequently, the assessee remained unaware of the disposal of the appeal, resulting in the delay in filing the present appeal. The Ld. Counsel, therefore, requested that the delay be condoned.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay of three days without adjudicating the issues on merits. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to consider the appeal afresh on merits, in accordance with law, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is also directed to furnish the relevant documentary evidence and explanations as may be required and to cooperate in the appellate proceedings without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

""थ"/ The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयु"/ Concerned CIT 4. आयकरआयु"(अपील) /The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय"ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, अहमदाबाद/ DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड"फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,सहायकपंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.