HIRALBEN RAVIBHAI KSHATRIYA,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYALHiralben Ravibhai Kshatriya, 32, Amidhara Society, Bopal Daskrol, Ahmedabad-380058. [PAN :CXVPK9950 M]
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
Delay Condoned
This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 04.06.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax
(Appeals)National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
The order passed by lower authorities is invalid, bad in law and required to be quashed.
The reopening of Assessing u/s.148 of the Act is bad in law and required to be quashed. Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 2–
Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming reopening of assessment without observing escapement merely for verification purpose.
Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of Rs.3761920/- u/s.69 of the Act by treating same as unexplained investment ignoring submission of appellant.
Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in not passing order as per the provision of section 250(6) of the Act.
Ld. NFAC ought to have condone the delay in filing appeal before him considering bona fide of the appellant.
Initiation of penalty proceeding u/s.271AAC of the Act is unjustified.
Charging of interest u/s.234A, 234B and 234C of the Act is unjustified.
The appellant craves to add, to alter, to substitute, to amend any ground/grounds of appeal at any time of hearing of the appeal is occasion arises.
On perusal of the record, we find that there was also a delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee did not furnish sufficient cause for condonation of the delay, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as not admitted. We further note that the assessee had not complied even during the proceedings before the Assessing Officer. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all necessary details, clarifications, and explanations would be furnished to the Revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 3–
with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 04.11.2025. S
/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL)
VICE-PRESIDENT
(True C
() ()
Ahmedabad; Dated 04.11.2025
MV
आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.