JITENDRAKUMAR ARVINDBHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BARDOLI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 922/SRT/2024Status: HeardITAT Surat22 January 2026AY 2017-18Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the assessee remained non-compliant despite being granted several opportunities. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the matters to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication, directing the assessee to submit all relevant evidence and comply with notices.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals against separate orders of the CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee was given multiple opportunities to provide details and explanations for unexplained expenditure but failed to comply.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) was rightly dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance and if the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SURAT BENCH, SURAT

Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Hearing: 20.01.2026Pronounced: 22.01.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & 922/Srt/2024 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Jitendrakumar Arvindbhai Patel, Income Tax Officer, Vs. At Post Nizar Goji, Ward-1/Ward-2, Ta. Bardoli, Bardoli. Bardoli HO, Surat-394601. [PAN : AOZPP2124H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : None Respondent by: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 20.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 22.01.2026 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-

The captioned two appeal have been filed by the Assessee against the separate orders dated 07.08.2024 &18.07.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“the CIT(A) in short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”), relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

On perusal of the records, it is observed that the assessee was afforded several opportunities of hearing to furnish details, clarifications, and explanations to substantiate the source of unexplained expenditure. However, despite being granted multiple opportunities, the assessee remained non-compliant and failed to furnish the requisite details or explanations before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), based on the material available on record, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee as ex-parte. Hence, in the interest & 922/Srt/2024 Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– of justice, we set aside the matters to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/evidence/document before the Ld.CIT(A) and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.

3.

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

The order is pronounced in the open Court on 22.01.2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →