BIPIN KANTILAL VAKTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1955/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 January 2026AY 2016-17Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT MS. SUCHITRA R. KAMBLE (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to comply with notices and the consequent ex-parte order by the Ld. CIT(A). However, considering the interest of justice and the assessee's request for an opportunity to comply, the matter was remanded.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with multiple notices. The assessee argued that there was a sufficient cause for non-compliance due to issues with their tax consultant's staff.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal ex-parte without adjudicating on merits, and if the assessee had a sufficient cause for non-compliance with notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri Samir Vora, AR
For Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.01.2026Pronounced: 13.01.2026

(Assessment Year: 2016-17) Bipinbhai Kantilal Vakta, Income-Tax Officer, Vs. 195, Doshiwadani Pole, Ward-1(2)(1), Kalupur, Ahmedabad-380001 Ahmedabad [PAN : AAGPV 4044 F] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant represented by : Shri Samir Vora, AR Respondent represented by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 13.01.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-

This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 17.09.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘Ld. CIT (A)’ in short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short) for Assessment Year 2016-17.

2.

The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- “1.1 The order passed by U/s.250 passed on 17.09.2025 for A.Υ. 2016-17 by NEAC, [CIT(A)], Delhi [for short CIT(A)"] upholding the addition of Rs.44,12,219/- made by A.O. as estimated profit @10% of the alleged bogus sales to M/S Vama Exports Ltd. is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 2.1 The Id. CIT(A), has grievously erred in law and or on facts in not appreciating that there could not be compliance to the notices claimed to be issued mainly on account of failure of the staff of tax consultant and the appellant. Thus, there was a sufficient cause for failure to comply with the notices claimed to be issued by NFAC.

2.2 The ld. CIT(A), has grievously erred in law and or on facts in disposing the appeal ex-parte instead of adjudicating on merits of the case which has resulted into violation of principles of natural justice. 3.1 The Id. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in upholding that the sales made to Vama Exports Ltd. were bogus or non-genuine and thereby conforming the addition of Rs.44,12,219/- made by A.O. as estimated profit @ 10% of the alleged bogus sales to M/S Vama Exports Ltd. 3.2 That the in the facts and circumstances of the Id. CIT(A), ought not to have upheld that sales made to Vama Exports Ltd. were bogus or non-genuine and Bipinbhai Kantilal Vakta Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2016-17 - 2– thereby confirming the addition of Rs.44,12,219/- made by A.O. as estimated profit @ 10% of the alleged bogus sales to M/S Vama Exports Ltd.”

3.

At the very outset, on perusal of the record, it is evident that notices under section 250 were issued on 17.06.2025, 15.07.2025, and 28.08.2025, calling upon the assessee to furnish requisite details, clarifications, and explanations in support of his claims. Despite the issuance of multiple notices by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee failed to comply. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the assessee’s appeal by passing an ex parte order.

4.

At the time of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that, if granted an opportunity, the assessee would make due compliance and furnish all requisite details, clarifications, and explanations before the revenue authorities. Considering the submission and in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee is directed to submit all relevant details, submissions, and documents before the Ld. CIT(A) and to comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 13.01.2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →