VINUBHAI JAYANTIBHAI SAGAR,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, HIMATNAGAR
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH
Before: Smt. Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member
And Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member
Vinubhai Jayantibhai Sagar
01, Sagar Vas, Vadali,
Sabarkantha
Gujarat-383235
PAN: BIQPS5708E
(Appellant)
Vs
The ITO,
Ward-1,
Himatnagar
(Respondent)
Assessee Represented: Shri Pritesh L Shah, A.R.
Revenue Represented: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr.D.R.
Date of hearing
: 03-06-2025
Date of pronouncement : 06-06-2025
आदेश/ORDER
PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against the exparte appellate order dated 10.11.2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year
2016-17. ITA No: 492/Ahd/2025
Assessment Year: 2016-17
I.T.A No. 492/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2016-17 Page No Vinubhai jayantibhai Sagar vs. ITO
2
2. At the outset, the assessee claimed that in Form NO. 35 of the appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A) categorically mentioned not to send the hearing notices through email. Without noticing the same, Ld.
CIT(A) issued four hearing notices between 21-06-2023 to 14-0-
2023 which was not complied by the assessee which has resulted in passing exparte appellate order. Further the Registry has noted that there is a delay of 398 days in filing the above appeal. The assessee by way of a Notarized Affidavit explained that he is semi- literate person not having knowledge of Income Tax laws. The same were handled by local ITP. Hence not aware of the exparte appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). However when recovery proceedings were initiated, he has engaged the Chartered Accountant from Ahmedabad and filed the present appeal with the delay of 398
days. The delay is neither intention nor wanton, but the circumstances mentioned above and requested to condone the delay.
Ld. Sr. D.R. appearing for the Revenue has no objection in condoning the delay and remit the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the case on merits.
We have heard the rival submission and perused the materials available on record. We are satisfied with the reasons explained by the assessee in the Notarized Affidavit. Thus we hereby condone the delay of 398 days in filing the above appeal. Since the assessee was served hearing notices through email, now Ld. CIT(A) is directed to issue physical notice of hearing to the assessee and decide the appeal on merits of the case. Needless to say that the assessee
I.T.A No. 492/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2016-17 Page No Vinubhai jayantibhai Sagar vs. ITO
3
should make use of this opportunity by filing all relevant material and evidences before Ld. CIT(A) and to pass order on merits of the case.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 06-06-2025 (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Ahmedabad : Dated 06/06/2025
आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / 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 अपीलȣय अͬधकरण,
अहमदाबाद