SHITALBEN PRASHANTBHAI FALDU,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 2(2)(1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against the order passed by the CIT(A). The assessee's counsel contended that the order was ex-parte and violated the principle of natural justice as the assessee could not appear before the CIT(A) and notices were not served. The assessee wished to submit documents to the lower authorities.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessment was carried out under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, and the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and non-speaking, violating the principle of natural justice by not providing sufficient opportunity for the assessee to be heard.
Key Issues
Violation of the principle of natural justice due to an ex-parte and non-speaking order by the CIT(A) without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”
Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINIBEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINIBEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI
आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोट�ायपीठ,राजकोट। राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT
BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 365/RJT/2025 (िनधा�रणवष� िनधा�रणवष�/Assessment Year: (2012-13) Shitalben Prashantbhai Faldu Shitalben Prashantbhai Faldu ACIT, Circle 2(2)(1) 10A, Shanti Niketan, Harihar Society, 10A, Shanti Niketan, Harihar Society, ITO, Amruta Estate Building, Nr. ITO, Amruta Estate Building, Nr. Vs. Kalawad Road, Rajkot – 360001 360001 Girnar Cinema, M. G. Road, Girnar Cinema, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360001 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: PAN/GIR No.: ACWPP4815A (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent)
Appellant by : ShriVimal Desai, Ld. AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. , Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 04/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement Date of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025
ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM: . Arjun Lal Saini, AM:
The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated dated 31.03.2025 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s. 14 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 14 3(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2012-13.
ITA No. 365/Rjt/2025 Shitalben P. Fuldu 2. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A) and the notices were not served before the Ld. CIT(A) and the notices were not served before the Ld. CIT(A) and the notices were not served on the assessee, however, there was compliance before the assessing officer. The on the assessee, however, there was compliance before the assessing officer. The on the assessee, however, there was compliance before the assessing officer. The Ld. Counsel submitted that ass Ld. Counsel submitted that assessee wants to submit all required all required details and documents before the Lower Authorities, therefore matter may be remitted back to documents before the Lower Authorities, therefore matter may be remitted back to documents before the Lower Authorities, therefore matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).
On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue he ld. DR for the Revenue relied on the finding of the relied on the finding of the assessing officer.
I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth 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 on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws 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 relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. her materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non- and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee grounds raised by the assessee.
Considering the above facts, Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits 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 based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair t is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair t is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair 2
ITA No. 365/Rjt/2025 Shitalben P. Fuldu play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. It is needless to say that the assessee will be at liberty to It is needless to say that the assessee will be at liberty to It is needless to say that the assessee will be at liberty to adduce any evidences as deemed relevant before the nces as deemed relevant before the Ld. CIT(A) at the time of Ld. CIT(A) at the time of proceedings in consequence to this order and the proceedings in consequence to this order and the Ld. CIT(A) shall, allow the shall, allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being, heard and to make relevant submissions, assessee adequate opportunity of being, heard and to make relevant submissions, assessee adequate opportunity of being, heard and to make relevant submissions, and then pass a speaking order which and then pass a speaking order which is fair and judicious.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
Order is pronounced in the open court on Order is pronounced in the open court on 11/09/2025
Sd/- (DR. A. L. SAINI) SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 11/09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to : The assessee The Respondent CIT The CIT(A) DR, ITAT, RAJKOT Guard File By order
Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot ITAT, Rajkot
