ABHAY HIRALAL GANDHI,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

MA 107/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Abhay Hiralal Gandhi, the appellant, who filed a Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, seeking rectification of an order that had dismissed his appeal as withdrawn. The appeal was initially withdrawn based on the belief that a rectification order from the Assessing Officer had resolved all issues, including the grant of full exemption under section 10(10AA) and acceptance of the returned income. However, the subsequent non-issuance of a refund led to the filing of the present application. The Tribunal found that the circumstances warranted a recall of the earlier order and restoration of the appeal for a detailed examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 789850 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT
• Keywords: Rectification of order
• Section: 10(10AA)

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद Ɋायपीठ “SMC”, अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD सुŵी सुिचũा काɾले, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵीमकरंद वसंत महादेवकर, लेखा सद˟ क े समƗ। BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No. 107/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No. 1955/Ahd/2024) (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Abhay Hiralal Gandhi, I/5, Bhalchandra Flats, Nr. Vasna Bus Stand, Vasna, Ahmedabad-380007 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6(1)(1), Ahmedabad [PAN No.ACUPG7952R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Kaushani Shah, AR on behalf of Shri Hardik Vora, AR Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 28.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.11.2025 O R D E R PER MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This Miscellaneous Application is filed under section 254(2) seeking rectification of the order dated 11.04.2025 in ITA No. 1955/Ahd/2024, whereby the appeal of the assessee was dismissed as withdrawn. 2. The Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 18 days in filing the present Miscellaneous Application. It is noted that while Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 107/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No. 1955/Ahd/2024) Abhay Hiralal Gandhi vs. ITO Asst.Year –2019-20 - 2– dismissing the appeal as withdrawn vide order dated 11.04.2025, this Bench had expressly granted liberty to the assessee to seek restoration in the event of any difficulty in obtaining the refund or any other connected issue. The assessee has placed on record the complete chronology of events explaining how the grievance regarding refund continued to remain unresolved despite repeated efforts, which led to the filing of the present application. Having regard to the specific liberty earlier granted by the Bench and keeping in view the circumstances explained in the application, we consider the reasons to be satisfactory. 3. Therefore, as an exception and without treating this order as a precedent, the delay is condoned, and the application is admitted for adjudication on merits in view of the prima facie merits involved in the issue. 4. The assessee submits that the withdrawal was based on a bona fide impression that the subsequent rectification order dated 25.10.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer, wherein the returned income was accepted and full exemption under section 10(10AA) was granted, had resolved the matter entirely. The assessee states that a written request dated 30.12.2024 was made to the Assessing Officer seeking refund of Rs. 1,88,580/- already paid pursuant to the earlier rectification order dated 29.10.2021. On this understanding, the Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 107/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No. 1955/Ahd/2024) Abhay Hiralal Gandhi vs. ITO Asst.Year –2019-20 - 3– assessee requested withdrawal of the appeal. The Tribunal thereafter dismissed the appeal as withdrawn and simultaneously granted liberty to seek restoration in case of any difficulty in securing the refund or any related issue. 5. The assessee has produced material to show that the refund of Rs. 1,88,580/- has not been issued despite the rectification order dated 25.10.2022, and no response was received to the representations dated 30.12.2024 and 23.05.2025. The grievance filed on 29.08.2025 was closed by the Department vide letter dated 29.10.2025 on the ground that, as per the appellate order of the CIT(A), the assessee is not entitled to full exemption under section 10(10AA). The assessee contends that this approach is inconsistent with the later rectification order of the Assessing Officer which had already accepted the returned income and granted full exemption. 6. It is submitted that the continued non-issuance of refund constitutes a supervening circumstance squarely covered by the liberty granted by the Bench. Therefore, the assessee prays that the appeal may be restored to its original number to enable adjudication on merits. Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 107/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No. 1955/Ahd/2024) Abhay Hiralal Gandhi vs. ITO Asst.Year –2019-20 - 4– 7. We have considered the submissions and examined the material placed on record. Para 6 of the Bench’s order dated 11.04.2025 records the following: 6. Considering the subsequent development and submissions made by the learned AR, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the assessee is granted liberty to restore the appeal in accordance with law, in case any difficulty arises in the matter of refund or any other connected issue. 8. This liberty is clear and unambiguous, and the present difficulty in securing the refund falls within its scope. 9. The assessee has demonstrated that despite the rectification order dated 25.10.2022, the refund has not been granted. The grievance was closed by citing the earlier appellate order, without addressing the effect of the subsequent rectification order. These facts support the assessee’s contention that the issue remains unresolved and that hardship persists. 10. In these circumstances, we are satisfied that restoration of the appeal is warranted in the interest of justice. The withdrawal was based on a bona fide belief that the matter stood settled at the level of the Assessing Officer. The non-issuance of refund thereafter constitutes a relevant circumstance justifying recall of the earlier order. Printed from counselvise.com MA No. 107/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No. 1955/Ahd/2024) Abhay Hiralal Gandhi vs. ITO Asst.Year –2019-20 - 5– 11. It is clarified that by restoring the appeal, we express no view on the merits of the claim under section 10(10AA) or the assessee’s entitlement to the refund of Rs. 1,88,580/-. The adjudication shall be carried out in accordance with law when the appeal is heard. 12. In view of the above discussion, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. The order dated 11.04.2025 in ITA No. 1955/Ahd/2024 is recalled, and the appeal is restored to its original number for hearing on merits. 13. The Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hearing in due course and issue notices to both parties. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 28/11/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 28/11/2025 Tanmay, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "