AGRY BUSINESS CENTRE,BHAVNAGAR V. THE ITO, WARD-1(9), BHAVNAGAR

ITA 944/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Agry Business Centre appealing against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which dismissed their appeal and rejected the request for condonation of delay. The primary issues in the appeal were the assumption of jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income Tax Act by the Assessing Officer and the addition of Rs. 27,45,100 on account of bank deposits. The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to comply with procedural requirements and the lack of sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal. However, in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717725 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-08-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-04-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJENKUMAR M VASAVDA
• Assessee Lawyers: MEHUL THAKKAR
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.944/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Agry Business Centre, Limbada Hanubhana, Umarala, Bhavnagar-364740. [PAN :AAOFA1500 D] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(9), Bhavnagar. (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul Thakkar, AR Respondent by: Shri Rajenkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12.08.2025 Date of Pronouncement 14.08.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 17.02.2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals: 1. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in dismissing the appeal of the appellant and rejecting the request for condonation of delay without considering the totality of the fact of the case. 2. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals)_National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi has erred in not disposing the following grounds raised before him. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 944/Ahd/2025 Agry Business Centre Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 2– Ground No. 1 The Ld. A.O. has erred in law in assuming jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act and further erred in completing the assessment under the said section. Ground No. 2 The Ld. A.O. has erred in making addition of Rs. 27,45,100/- on bank deposit (cash and cheque), being the trading receipts deposited in to the bank without considering the totality of the facts in detail. 3. The appellant craves leave, to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any grounds before or at the time of hearing. 3. On perusal of the record, we find that notices of hearing were issued on several occasions, however, the assessee failed to furnish the requisite documents. There was also a delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee did not furnish sufficient cause for condonation of the delay, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as not admitted. We further note that the assessee had not complied even during the proceedings before the Assessing Officer. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, if granted an opportunity, all necessary details, clarifications, and explanations would be furnished to the Revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo assessment. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Assessing Officer and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 944/Ahd/2025 Agry Business Centre Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2012-13 - 3– 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 14.08.2025. Sd/- Sd/- (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT (True Copy) Ahmedabad; Dated 14.08.2025 MV 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, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "