ABHISHEK HARSHADKUMAR THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD V. ITO, WARD-1, LUNAWADA

ITA 1338/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Abhishek Harshadkumar Thakkar, the appellant, contesting the orders passed by the lower tax authorities, which included the levying of interest under various sections of the Income-tax Act and the initiation of proceedings under incorrect sections. The appellant argued that the orders were bad in law, invalid, and violated principles of natural justice, particularly due to the lack of opportunity for cross-examination and the non-provision of seized material. The Income-Tax Officer (ITO) and the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) had previously dismissed the appellant's claims, leading to this appeal. The tribunal found that the appellant had not been given a fair opportunity to present his case at the CIT(A) level due to unforeseen circumstances, and thus remanded the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 781365 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 19-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT
• Assessee Lawyers: PARIN SHAH
• Keywords: Set aside; Corroborative evidences; Principle of natural justice; Opportunity of cross examination
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3); 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1338/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) Abhishek Harshadkumar Thakkar, B-303, Vandematram Greens, Opp. Sai Temple, Sattadhar, Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad-380061 [PAN : ALNPT 6426 H] Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Lunawada (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Parin Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 29.09.2025 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 09.06.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)” for short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short), relating to the Assessment Year 2019- 20. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds:- “1. The Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the Ld. AO in levying interest u/s. 234A/B/C/D of the Act. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, DLEETE, modify 0R change all 0R any of the grounds of appeal at the time of 0R before the hearing of the appeal. 3. Appellant prays that appeal may be set aside to file of CIT (A) for adjudication on merits considering submission of the appellant. 4. The order passed by lower authorities are invalid, bad in law and required to be quashed. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1338/Ahd/2025 Abhishek Harshadkumar Thakkar Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2019-20 - 2– 5. The Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the action of the AO as the proceedings are initiated u/s 147/148 of the Act as against 153C of the Act, hence the proceedings are bad in law and void-ab- initio. 6. The Ld. NFAC has erred in confirming the action of the AO is issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act and passing the order u/s 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Act as the notices issued u/s 148A(a)/148A(b) and the order passed u/s 148A(d) of the Act are bad in law and hence the proceedings initiated u/s 148 of the Act are void-ab-initio and inter-alia in absence of a valid legal sanction. 7. The Ld. NFAC has erred in law confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in subjecting the addition in hands of the appellant as the AO did not provide the copy of seized material and opportunity of cross examination, hence the order passed against the assessee is bad in law and against the grounds of natural justice. 8. Both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts of the case in not relying upon any corroborative evidences and without affording opportunity for cross-examination, in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 9. The Ld. NFAC has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in subjecting addition of Rs 5,70,00,000 u/s 69 of the Act, which is based on surmises conjectures and without any documentary evidence. 10. Both the lower authorities have passed the orders without properly appreciating the facts and they further erred in grossly ignoring various submissions, explanations and information submitted by the appellant from time to time which ought to have been considered before passing the impugned order. The action of the lower authorities is in clear breach of law and Principles of Natural Justice and since also without affording the appellant the opportunity of Cross Examination and therefore deserves to be quashed.” 3. On going through the record, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has accorded three opportunities of hearing to the assessee vide notice dated 08.04.2025, 02.05.2025 and 29.05.20225. Despite this, the assessee neither submitted any written submissions nor appeared before the Ld. CIT(A), nor sought adjournment. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte. Before us, Ld. AR of the assessee, submitted that due to unforeseen circumstances, the assessee could not appear before the Ld. CIT(A), and, therefore, prayed that given an opportunity, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1338/Ahd/2025 Abhishek Harshadkumar Thakkar Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2019-20 - 3– due compliances will be made and all the requisite details would be provided to the Revenue Authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, the matter is remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication. The assessee shall submit all the submission/evidence/documents before the Ld. CIT(A) and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 29.09.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 29.09.2025 **btk आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation ….words processed by Hon’ble VP on his PC on 25.09.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member …..25.09.2025 3. Other Member ….25.09.2025 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S ….25.09.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is ed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement …..29.09.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S ……...29.09.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk ……..29.09.2025 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "