ANKUR KIRITKUMAR MEHTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal primarily due to the assessee's non-responsive conduct, without a detailed examination of the evidence. The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for de novo consideration, granting the assessee a fresh opportunity to present their case.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 34,00,000/- for contribution to a political party. The Assessing Officer disallowed this deduction, holding the donation to be non-genuine based on information from the Investigation Wing. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee and whether the disallowance of deduction under Section 80GGC was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 147,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 149,Section 80GGC,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 25.06.2025 passed for A.Y. 2019-20. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:
The CIT(A) erred in passing order on 25th June, 2025 dismissing the appeal “1.0 filed by the appellant. The order has been passed by the CIT(A) without affording reasonable opportunity of being heard. The order passed by the CIT(A) be quashed.
0 The CIT(A) on the law and facts ough
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.
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
- 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 →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
