ASHVINBHAI BHIMJIBHAI PATEL (LIMBANI),AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 351/AHD/2024Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 September 2024AY 2011-12Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri TR Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Since the appellate order was ex-parte, the Tribunal set aside the matter back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after the assessee files all relevant materials.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT against an ex-parte order passed by the NFAC. There was a significant delay in filing the appeal, which the assessee attributed to not being informed of hearing dates by their former CA.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was whether to condone the delay in filing the appeal and whether to set aside an ex-parte appellate order for a decision on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH

Before: Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Shri TR Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Parin S. Shah, A.R
For Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. D.R

आदेश/ORDER PER : TR SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee as against the ex- parte appellate order dated 16-08-2023 passed by NFAC, Delhi arising out of the reassessment order passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) relating to assessment year 2011-12.

2.

Registry has noted that there is a delay 133 of days in filing the appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining that the hearing notices of Ld. CIT(A) were gone to the former C.A. who has not informed the hearing dates to the assessee. However, on 05-07-2023, the assessee got SMS regarding the further hearing and the later Counsel, Shri Parin Shah, sought for adjournment on 20-07-2023. However, on 05-01-2024 an Inspector attached with the Department called the assessee, informing the recovery proceedings pursuant to ex-parte appellate order by ld. CIT(A), then the assessee came to know about the ex-parte order which has resulted in delay of 133 days in filing the above appeal before the Tribunal. The delay is neither willful nor wanton and therefore requested to condone the delay in the interest of justice. The ld. Sr. D.R., Shri Prateek Sharma, appearing for the revenue has no serious objection, hence the delay of 133 days in filing the above appeal is hereby condoned.

3.

At the outset, the ld. counsel, Mr. Parin S. Shah, stated that the matter be considered for remitting it back to the file of CIT(A) to decide the case on merits. Since its reopening of assessment, the assessee challenged the validity of reopening as well as merits of the case, since the appellate order being an ex-parte order and requested to set aside the matter back to the file of CIT(A). Further, ld. counsel undertaken to file all relevant materials and evidences will be filed before ld. CIT(A).

4.

Ld. Sr. D.R., Shri Prateek Sharma, appearing for the revenue submitted that this should be the final opportunity given to the assessee.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration and perused the materials available on record. Since the appellate order being an ex-parte order, we deem it fit to set aside the matter back to the file of CIT(A) so that the assessee is directed to file all relevant materials and records before CIT(A) and he can pass order on merits of the case. Needless to say, the assessee should make this final opportunity given to him and co- operate with the ld. CIT(A) for passing order on merits.

6.

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

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →