KAMLESH MOTWANI,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-2(1),BHOPAL, BHOPAL
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 07.08.2023 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 08.12.2018 passed by learned DCIT/ACIT-2(1), Bhopal [“AO”] u/s 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2016-17, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).
Page 1 of 7
Kamlesh Motwani ITA No. 518/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17
The registry has informed that the present appeal is filed after a delay
and therefore time-barred. The assessee has filed an application/affidavit for
condonation of delay; the same is scanned and re-produced for an
immediate reference:
Page 2 of 7
Kamlesh Motwani ITA No. 518/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17
Page 3 of 7
Kamlesh Motwani ITA No. 518/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17
The averments made by assessee in above affidavit, which are self-
explanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed and the Ld.
DR for revenue does not have any objection if the bench condones delay and
accordingly left it to the wisdom of bench. We have considered the
explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or
Page 4 of 7
Kamlesh Motwani ITA No. 518/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17
material on record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for
delay in filing present appeal. We find that section 253(5) of the Act
empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if
there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time.
It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land
Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387
that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed
to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting
a justice-oriented approach. Thus, taking into account the facts of case, the
provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we
take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with
hearing.
Ld. AR for assessee submits that the section 250(6) of the Income-tax
Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the
appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the
decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. He further submits that in
present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal although
due to non-prosecution by assessee on the dates of hearing but still without
complying with the mandate of section 250(6). Therefore, the impugned first
appeal-order passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside.
Ld. AR next submitted that the assessment-order passed by AO is also
ex-parte u/s 144 wherein the AO has made a total addition of Rs.
2,43,18,080/- [Disallowance of cost of Rs. 1,07,21,118/- (+) Disallowance of
Page 5 of 7
Kamlesh Motwani ITA No. 518/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17
exemption u/s 54F of Rs. 1,35,96,962/-, claimed by assessee in
computation of taxable long-term capital gain] for lack of submissions by
assessee. However, the assessee has compiled/collected all required details/
documents and is very much ready to make a proper representation before
AO if an opportunity is given and hence prays that the present matter
should be remanded to AO to enable the AO to make a fresh adjudication
and compute correct taxable income/tax liability of assessee.
Ld. DR for revenue agreed to the submission of Ld. AR but made a
request to direct the assessee to represent his case before AO and do not
seek unnecessary adjournments.
In view of above, having regard to the principle of natural justice and
also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the
present matter is restored at the level of AO, we remand this matter back to
the file of AO for adjudication afresh. The AO shall give necessary
opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order
uninfluenced by his earlier order.
We also find that the assessee is suffering from cancer. Therefore, we
are not imposing any cost upon assessee although there appears some
lethargy on the part of assessee in making representation before lower
authorities. However, we direct the assessee to remain vigilant and ensure
participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek
Page 6 of 7
Kamlesh Motwani ITA No. 518/Ind/2025 - AY 2016-17
unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass
appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 19/02/2026
Sd/- Sd/-
(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Indore
िदनांक/Dated : 19/02/2026
Patel/Sr. PS
Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore
Page 7 of 7
