KHAJA HUSSAIN,DEODURGA DISTRICT, RAICHUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, RAICHUR, RAICHUR, KARNATAKA
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) failed to consider the adjournment request of the assessee and dismissed the appeal without proper adjudication. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the NFAC which dismissed the appeal for want of documents. The assessee had sought an adjournment to furnish details regarding agricultural income and a gift received. The CIT(A) did not consider the adjournment request and dismissed the appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the assessee's request for adjournment and opportunity to submit documents.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi, vide order dated 14/11/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/ S/250/2024-25/1070368605(1) for the assessment year 2017-18.
The learned AR before us submitted that the last notice was issued by the learned CIT(A) dated 15 October 2024 for making the necessary compliance by 21 October 2024. The assessee, in response to such notice, sought 4 weeks’ time by letter dated 21 October 2024.
However, the learned CIT(A) did not take note of such adjournment letter and passed the order dated 14 November 2024 by dismissing the impugned grounds of appeal for want of documents. The grounds of appeal of the assessee were on the following issues: i. Agricultural income of ₹ 6,12,810.00 ii. Gift from the son ₹ 5,00,000.00 2.1 The reason for the confirmation given by the learned CIT(A) was non-furnishing of supporting evidence by the assessee. However, the learned AR before us submitted that the assessee was in the process of collecting the relevant information and therefore the adjournment was sought. The learned AR further submitted that the assessee needs one more opportunity to furnish the required details. It was further prayed to set aside the issue to the file of the AO as the necessary documents were not furnished even during the assessment proceedings.
On the other hand, the learned DR opposed giving another opportunity to the assessee.
The learned AR, in his rejoinder, submitted that the assessee has been declaring income under the head agricultural sources since many years, which was not taken into consideration by the learned CIT(A) while disposing of the appeal of the assessee.
We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Considering the fact that the learned AR sought adjournment for 4 weeks by letter dated 21 October 2024, which was not taken into account by the learned CIT(A) while . dismissing the impugned grounds of appeal of the assessee, we are, in the interest of justice and fair play, inclined to afford one more opportunity to the assessee. Hence, we set aside the finding of the learned CIT(A) and remit the issue back to the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. Thus, the ground of appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in court on 8th day of September, 2025
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
