VISION INFRACON (INDIA) PVT LTD,RAJKOT vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(5), RAJKOT, RAJKOT
Facts
The assessee filed four appeals against orders related to assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11, which arose from assessment and penalty orders. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) for quantum appeals, leading to the issue not being adjudicated on merits.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to be heard and could not plead their case before the CIT(A), violating the principle of natural justice. Therefore, the appeals were set aside and remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating the appeals on merits due to the assessee's non-appearance, and if principles of natural justice were violated.
Sections Cited
147, 271(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA
आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, राजकोट �यायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं /.ITA Nos. 454, 455, 456 & 457/RJT/2025 �नधा�रणवष�/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 बनाम Vision Infracon (India) Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer 130, Golden Plaza, Opp. J P Tower, Vs. Ward-1(2)(5), Rajkot Tagore Road, Gujarat-360001 PAN : AACCV6558K (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) :
�नधा�रती क� ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Mehul Ranpura, ld.AR राज�व क� ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� तार�ख /Date of Hearing : 17/11/2025 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 17/11/2025 ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member: Captioned four appeals filed by the assessee, pertaining to A.Ys. 2009- 10 and 2010-11, are directed against the separate orders passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), all dated 28.05.2025, which in turn arise out of separate assessment orders u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and penalty orders u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act passed by the Assessing Officer.
ITA Nos. 454 to 457/Rjt/2025 Vision Infracon (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2 2. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ITA No.454/Rjt/2025 for A.Y. 2009-10 and ITA No.456/Rjt/2025 for A.Y. 2010-11 are quantum appeals, where the assessee did not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate proceedings. The Ld. CIT(A), however, condone the delay in filing the appeal, but, did not adjudicate the issue on merit. Therefore, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that these four appeals of the assessee including the penalty appeals in ITA Nos. 455 & 457/Rjt/2025 for A.Y. 2009- 10 and A.Y. 2010-11 should be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, as the assessee could not plead his case, by submitting documents and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A).
However, Ld. DR for the Revenue did not raise any objection if these four appeals are to be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). We note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. We note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking
ITA Nos. 454 to 457/Rjt/2025 Vision Infracon (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3 order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed.
It is needless to say that the assessee will be at liberty to adduce any evidences as deemed relevant before the Ld. CIT(A) at the time of proceedings before him, in consequence to this order and the Ld. CIT(A) shall allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and to make relevant submissions and then pass a speaking order which is fair and judicious.
In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 17/11/2025
Sd/- Sd/- (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) (DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट /Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 17/11/2025 True Copy आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant ��यथ�/ The Respondent आयकर आयु�/ CIT आयकर आयु�(अपील)/ The CIT(A)/(NFAC), Delhi. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, राजकोट/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT गाड�फाईल/ Guard File By order/आदेश से ,
/T Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot
