SOLACE INN,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD
THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH
Before Dr. BRR Kumar, Vice President
And Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member
Solace Inn,
Vraj Building,
Mehta Chamber Ashram
Road, Ahmedabad
PAN: ADEFS1107K
(Appellant)
Vs
The ITO,
Ward-1(1)(3)
Ahmedabad
(Respondent)
Assessee by: Shri Manish J. Shah &
Shri Rushin Patel, A.Rs.
Revenue by: Shri Uday Kishanrao Kakne, Sr. D.R.
Date of hearing
: 06-10-2025
Date of pronouncement
: 17-11-2025
आदेश/ORDER
Per Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member:
This is an appeal filed against the order dated 16-07-
2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC),
Delhi for assessment year 2020-21. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under:-
Sl. No. Grounds of appeal
Tax effect relating to each Ground of appeal
1
The ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in law and on facts of the case, in not condoning the delay in filing appeal.
Rs. 1,23,78,040/-
2
The ld. AO has erred in law and on facts of the case in making addition of Rs. 98,02,874/-u/s.56(2)(x) of the Act.
Rs.34,18,907/-
Assessment Year 2020-21
I.T.A No. 1623/Ahd/2025
Solace Inn, A.Y. 2020-21
2
3
The ld. AO has erred in law and on facts of the case in making addition of Rs.1,14,86,068/-u/s.69 of the Act.
Rs.89,59,133/-
4
The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing, if need arise.
Total tax effect
Rs. 1,23,78,040/-
The assessee is a firm and filed its return of income for assessment year 2020-21 on 10-01-2021 declaring total income at Rs. nil and claimed current year business loss at Rs. 18,915/- . The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 29-06-2021. The assessee was given several opportunities but assessee has not responded the same, therefore the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 98,02,874/- as per provisos of section 56(2)(x) of the Act.
Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The A.R. submitted that the CIT(A) was not right in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). On merit, the ld. A.R. submitted that the addition of Rs. 98,02,874/- u/s. 56(2)(x) of the Act was not justified. The addition of Rs. 1,14,86,068/- u/s. 69 of the Act was not justified as assessment order as well as CIT(A) has not given proper opportunities to file the details before both the authorities.
The ld. D.R. relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).
We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that I.T.A No. 1623/Ahd/2025
Solace Inn, A.Y. 2020-21
3
that the assessee has not filed details before the Assessing
Officer as well as the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) has only mentioned the notice issued to the assessee but has not mentioned whether the notices were served to the assessee or not. The delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) needs to be condoned and hence the same is condoned. Since the assessee has not filed details, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper verification of the details and adjudication of the issues on merit. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17-11-2025 (Dr. BRR Kumar) (Suchitra Kamble)
Vice President Judicial Member
Ahmedabad : Dated 17/11/2025
आदेश क त
ल प अे षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:-
1. Assessee
Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार
आयकर अपीलय अधकरण,
अहमदाबाद