PRABHATBHAI KHODABHAI DESAI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(1) EARLIER WARD-7(1)(4), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers

ITA 384/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 August 2025AY 2016-17Bench: the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, due compliances will be made and all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided 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 Assessing Officer for conducting assessment de-novo. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply wi3 pages

AI SummaryAllowed for statistical purposes

What did the Tribunal hold?

Given the assessee's plea for an opportunity to comply, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment. The assessee was directed to submit all relevant documents and comply with future notices without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2016-17, challenging additions of Rs. 13,00,000 (gratuity/leave encashment based on Form 26AS) and Rs. 10,84,160 (arbitrary addition from securities transactions). The assessee had failed to comply with notices issued by the CIT(A) under Section 250 and also before the Assessing Officer.

What were the issues?

The key issue was whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming additions due to the assessee's non-compliance, or if a fresh opportunity for compliance and de-novo assessment by the Assessing Officer was warranted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri Manish Shah, AR

For Respondent: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR

Hearing: 14.08.2025Pronounced: 25.08.2025

O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 16.01.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Mumbai/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:

(1) The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.13,00,000/- based solely on Form 26AS, without considering the exempt nature of gratuity and leave encashment. Prabhatbhai K Desai Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2016-17 - 2– (2) The learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the arbitrary addition of Rs.10,84,160/- estimated at 0.01% of total securities transactions, without any substantive verification or inquiry.

On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 28.01.2020, 29.12.2020, 29.03.2022, 25.10.2022 & 02.11.2022, requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation to substantiate its claims. Despite several opportunities and notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee failed to furnish the requisite submissions/documents. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. We also find that the assessee failed to comply even before the Assessing Officer. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, due compliances will be made and all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided 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 Assessing Officer for conducting assessment de-novo. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →