ATULKUMAR ARVINDBHAI PATEL,PETLAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(3)(1),, PETLAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the assessee's explanation and the Revenue's no objection. The matter was set aside to the Assessing Officer for fresh assessment with a cost.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte appellate order, citing a delay due to incorrect email notifications. The assessee had migrated to the USA and missed hearing notices sent to an old email address.
What were the issues?
Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned and if the matter should be remanded for fresh assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH
Before: Shri TR Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha
आदेश/ORDER PER : TR SENTHIL KUMAR , JUDICIAL MEMBER:-
This appeal is filed by the assessee as against the ex-prate appellate order dated 22-06-2023 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of the ex-parte re-assessment order passed u/s. 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) relating to the assessment year 2011-12.
The registry has noted that there is a delay of 168 days in filing the above appeal. The assessee by a notarized affidavit stated that he has migrated to USA since 2018 and filed an appeal before CIT(A) in 2019 and he updated his email id in CPC portal in 2022. In Form No. 35, assessee mentioned email address is “sukhadia88@yahoo.in” his tax practioner but the ld. CIT(A) wrongly sent email notices to “ajaykumardalwadi@yahoo.com”. Thus, the assessee was not aware of hearing notices issued by ld. CIT(A) which resulted in passing ex-parte order. When assessee returned India in Jan, 2024, and on verification with the ITP and CPC portals, he found that ex-parte appellate order passed on 22- 06-2023, thereby filed the appeal with a delay of 168 days and requested to condone delay. The ld. Sr. D.R. Shri Rignesh Das, appearing for the Revenue has no objection in condoning the delay. Thus, the delay of 168 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
On merits of the case, the assessee has not explained the cash deposits and credit card expenses amounting to Rs. 50,35,332/-, therefore, the same were added as undisclosed income of the assessee and demanded the tax thereon. Before us, the assessee filed a paper book containing statement of cash deposits in bank account, details of credit card repayments and other details. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of jurisdictional Assessing Officer by imposing a cost of Rs. 5000/- (Rs. Five Thousand Only) payable by the assessee within 15 days from the receipt of this order to the Income Tax Department. On compliance of the above cost, Jurisdictional Assessing Officer is directed to pass fresh assessment order in accordance with law by giving adequate opportunity of hearing.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 07-02-2025 Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (TR SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 07/02/2025 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026