VIJAYABEN RAJUBHAI THAKOR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5) (PREVIOUSLY WARD-3(3)(12), AHMEDABAD

PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

“1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in deciding the appeal ex-parte in violation of principles of natural justice. 2) The Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts of the case in reopening the assessment u/s.147 of the Act. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the action of reopening is without jurisdiction and in not permissible either in law or on facts. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the addition of Rs.3,20,48,140/- on account of capital gain on sale of land. 4) Both the lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts of the case and solely relying on the information received from DCIT. This action of the lower authorities is in clear breach of law and principles of natural justice and therefore deserves to be quashed.

& 25/Ahd/2024 Assessment Years: 2009-10 for both Vijayaben Rajubhai Thakor vs. ITO Page 3 of 5 5) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO in levying interest u/s.234A/B/C/D of the Act. 6) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO in initiating penalty proceedings under various sections of the Act. 7) The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.”

ITA No.25/Ahd/2024 for A.Y. 2009-10

“1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in deciding the appeal ex-parte in violation of principles of natural justice. 2) The Ld. AO has erred in law and on facts of the case in initiating penalty proceedings u/s.271(1)c) of the Act. 3) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the levy of penalty of Rs.1,07,82,129/- u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. 4) The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.”

5. Shri Tushar Hemani, Ld. Sr. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had not adjudicated appeal of the assessee on merits and had dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground that the assessee had not made any compliance in the course of appeal proceeding. He submitted that the issue were not examined on merits as per the mandate of Section 250(6) of the Act. The Ld. Sr. Counsel requested that the matter may be set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the appeal of the assessee on merits in accordance with law. The Ld. Sr. Counsel further submitted that the assessee will co-operate with the Ld. CIT(A) and furnish all necessary details and explanations as called for by the CIT(A) in the set aside appellate proceeding.

6. Per contra, Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee had neither appeared before the Assessing Officer nor before the Ld. CIT(A) and no & 25/Ahd/2024 Assessment Years: 2009-10 for both Vijayaben Rajubhai Thakor vs. ITO Page 4 of 5 compliance was made by the assessee at all at any stage. Under the circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) had no occasion to examine the matter on merits as no material was ever brought on record by the assessee. Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities.

7. We have considered the rival submissions. The assessee has not explained the reason for non-compliance either before the Assessing Officer or before the Ld. CITA). In the absence of any explanation, we deem it proper to impose a cost of Rs.5,000/- on the assessee, which should be paid to the Income Tax Department within 15 days of receipt of this order. Further, as the matter was not examined on merits by the Ld. CIT(A), we deem it proper to set aside the file to the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to allow another opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to co-operate and comply with the notices issued by the CIT(A) in the said proceeding.

9. As the matter regarding quantum addition is set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), we also deem it proper to set aside the appeal in in respect of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act, to the file of Ld. CIT(A). This appeal of the assessee is also allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open Court on this 28th April, 2025.