ALKA RAJEN SHAH,RAJKOT V. THE ITO WARD 1 (1) (1) , RAJKOT

ITA 151/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Alka Rajen Shah, the appellant, contesting an ex-parte order from the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which arose from an earlier order by the Assessing Officer under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal summarily on grounds of non-prosecution, which was claimed to be against the principles of natural justice. Additionally, the appellant contested the issuance of notice under section 148 and the subsequent additions made under sections 69 and 115BBE, related to long-term capital gains and losses. The Tribunal noted the absence of adequate opportunity for the appellant to present her case and the lack of a speaking order from the CIT(A), leading to the decision to remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312483 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: RAJU MANEK
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144; 69

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH “SMC”, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.151/RJT/2025 Assessment Year: (2019-20) Alka Rajen Shah, 59, Silver Sand B/h. Parijat Party Plot Off: 150 Feet Ring Road, Rajkot- 360 005 PAN : AYKPS 4510 K Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), Rajkot, Income Tax Officer, M.G. Road, Beside Girnar Cinema, Rajkot-360 001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by. : Shri Raju Manek, AR राजèव कȧ ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख /Date of Hearing : 13/03/2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख /Date of Pronouncement : 30/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. ARJUNLAL SAINI AM; Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2019-20, is directed against the order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, vide order dated 12.11.2024, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer, dated 26.03.2024, u/s.147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the appeal: ITA No. 151/RJT/2025 A.Y 19-20 Alka R Shah Page | 2 “1. The learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in dismissing the appeal summarily on the ground of non prosecution which is bad on facts and also in law as it is against the law of natural justice. 2. The learned CIT Appeal has passed order ex parte without adjudicating on merits on the issues raised before him which is bad on facts and also in law and ought to be set aside to learned CIT Appeal. 3. Without prejudice to above grounds (i) The learned Assessing Officer has erred in issuing notice u/s.148 of I.T. Act 1961 which is had in law and also on the facts. (ii) The learned Assessing Officer has erred in making addition u/s. 69 r.w.s. 115BBE considering that there was benefits of Long term capital gain/ Long term capital loss by claiming of Rs.28,06,614/-, which is bad on facts and also in law which ought to be deleted.” 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset submitted that the appeal has been filed by the assessee belatedly for 25 days. The learned Counsel adverted my attention to the affidavit filed in this regard citing reasons for condonation of delay and urged for a benign view and sought condonation of delay of 25 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. A perusal of the affidavit gives me an impression of existence of mitigating circumstances to enable me to exercise my discretion in favour of the assessee. Accordingly, the delay is condoned. 4. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. During the appellate proceedings, the notices of hearing were not served on the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee, therefore, contended that in the interest of justice, one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to contest the appeal before the Assessing Officer, as the assessee needs to file some fresh documents and evidences to prove his claim. ITA No. 151/RJT/2025 A.Y 19-20 Alka R Shah Page | 3 5. On the other hand, the learned Senior DR for the revenue, argued that there is a non-compliance on the part of the assessee, before the Assessing Officer as well as before the ld. CIT(A), during the appellate proceedings, therefore, it is just wasting the time and resources of the lower authorities, if the matter is remitted back to the file of the lower authorities. Therefore, ld. Sr.DR contended that a cost of Rs.500/- may be imposed on the assessee, and then this matter may be restored back to the file of the assessing officer, for fresh adjudication. 6. I have heard both the parties. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 144 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. However, on account of non-compliance attitude of the assessee, a cost of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) is imposed on the assessee, which is to be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund. 7. Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of natural justice. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file of the Assessing ITA No. 151/RJT/2025 A.Y 19-20 Alka R Shah Page | 4 Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30/04/2025. Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) लेखा सदÖय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट /Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 30/04/2025 DKP Outsourcing Sr.P.S आदेश कì ÿितिलिप अúेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :  अपीलाथê/ The Appellant  ÿÂयथê/ The Respondent  आयकर आयुĉ/ CIT  आयकर आयुĉ(अपील)/ The CIT(A)  िवभागीय ÿितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, राजकोट/ DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  गाडªफाईल/ Guard File // True Copy // By order/आदेशसे , सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ,राजकोट "