VARSHABEN JAYANTIBHAI TRADA,UTRAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 2(1) (1), SURAT

PDF · subscribers
ITA 913/SRT/2025Status: HeardITAT Surat09 October 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Bench decided to give one more opportunity to the assessee to represent their case before the Ld. CIT(A), restoring the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal challenging an order passed by the NFAC/CIT(A) for the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee was ex-parte before the Ld. CIT(A) due to a reasonable cause.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee had a reasonable cause for not appearing before the CIT(A) and if the appeal should be restored for a fresh hearing.

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, SURAT

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Hearing: 06.10.2025Pronounced: 09.10.2025

Assessment Year: 2018-19 Varshaben Jayantibhai Vs DCIT, Circle – 2(1)(1) Trada Room No. 612, Aayakar 9/10, Aastha Residency, Bhawan, Majura Gate, Near Utran Bridge, Utran Surat - 395002 – 394105. PAN – ACAPT9657N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shree Suresh Kabra, CA Revenue by Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 06.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.10.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 07.10.2024 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2018-19.

2.

At the very outset, we noticed that assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A). In this regard Ld. AR explained the circumstances before the bench that there was ‘sufficient cause’ which prevented the assessee to represent Varshaben Jayantibhai Trada, Utran. properly before Ld. CIT(A). On the other hand DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities.

3.

Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that there was reasonable cause, because of which assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Hence the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee 4. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.

5.

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 09/10/2025 Sd/- Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT SANDEEP GOSAIN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat: Dated: 09/10/2025 KRK, Sr. PS.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →