ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE V. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

ITA 595/IND/2025

AI Insights

The case involves four appeals filed by the assessee, Anil Turakhia, against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) related to the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15. The appeals were initially delayed due to various physical and financial setbacks faced by the assessee. The ITAT considered the explanations provided for the delays, citing the principles of substantial justice over technical considerations, and condoned the delays. The main legal issue was the non-compliance with section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which mandates that the CIT(A)'s order must be in writing, stating the points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for the decision. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeals due to non-prosecution without adhering to this mandate.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837422 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 09-07-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORASSESSEESUBMITTEDTHATTHEASSESSEEHASFILED; FORASSESSEEEXPLAINEDTHEVARIOUSPHYSICALANDFINANCIALSETBACKS; FORREVENUE; BEINGFAIRENOUGH; FORREVENUEAGREEDTOTHESUBMISSIONOFLD.ARBUTMADEA; SHRIASHISHPORWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIASHISH GOYAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144; 143(3)

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 9 आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौरɊायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025 (AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 ) Anil Turakhia, 19 Rani Sati Colony, Y.N. Road, Indore बनाम/ Vs. ITO 5(1) Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN:ABTPT7760N Assessee by Shri Ashish Goyal, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R Per Bench: The captioned four (4) appeals are filed by assessee, the details are as under: ITA No. AY Impugned order Original proceeding Delay 1 593/Ind/2025 2013-14 Order of first-appeal dated 09.06.2023 passed by CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, bearing DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1053628875(1) Assessment-order dated 27.09.2021 passed by AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 701 days Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 2 of 9 2 594/Ind/2025 2013-14 Order of first-appeal dated 28.05.2024 passed by CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, bearing DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065196815(1) Assessment-order dated 27.09.2021 passed by AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 347 days 3 595/Ind/2025 2014-15 Order of first-appeal dated 09.06.2023 passed by CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, bearing DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1053629319(1) Assessment-order dated 27.09.2021 passed by AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 701 days 4 596/Ind/2025 2014-15 Order of first-appeal dated 28.05.2024 passed by CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, bearing DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065196538(1) Assessment-order dated 15.09.2021 passed by AO, National Faceless Assessment Centre u/s 144 r.w.s. 254 347 days 2. Since these appeals involve identical facts and issues, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order. 3. The registry has informed that these appeals have been filed after delay of days as mentioned in the last column of the Table in earlier Para No. 1. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed applications/affidavits in all these matters for condonation of delay. The applications/affidavits filed by assessee are identical, therefore we re- produce below one of those: Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 3 of 9 Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 4 of 9 Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 5 of 9 Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 6 of 9 4. The averments made by assessee in above application, which are self- explanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed. The Ld. AR for assessee explained the various physical and financial setbacks/ challenges faced and still being faced by assessee due to which the delays have occurred in filing these appeals. Ld. AR, with folded hands on behalf of assessee, made a humble prayer to consider assessee’s situation liberally and judicially and condone delays. Ld. DR for revenue, being fair enough, does not have any objection if the bench condones delay and accordingly left it to the wisdom of bench. We have considered the explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or material on record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for delay in filing present appeals. We find that section 253(5) of the Act empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time. It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387 that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting a justice-oriented approach. Thus, taking into account the facts of case, the provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 7 of 9 5. Ld. AR next submitted that the section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 provides “The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal shall be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision.”. He submitted that in present case, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s first appeals although due to non-prosecution by assessee on the dates of hearing but still without complying with the mandate of section 250(6). Therefore, the impugned first appeal-orders passed by Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be set aside. In so far as the reasoning of non-prosecution before CIT(A) is concerned, Ld. AR narrated the very same physical and financial setbacks/challenges faced by assessee as stated by assessee in the applications for condonation of delay. However, Ld. AR acknowledged, that the assessee is having in his possession all required details/documents and is willing and ready to make a proper representation before CIT(A) if an opportunity is given and hence prays that in the interest of justice, these matters ought to be remanded to CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. 6. Ld. DR for revenue agreed to the submission of Ld. AR but made a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. 7. In view of above submissions of parties, having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of CIT(A), we Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 8 of 9 remand these matters back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. The CIT(A) shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass appropriate order(s) uninfluenced by his earlier order(s). 8. We also find that the assessee has been suffering from physical and financial challenges. Therefore, we are not imposing any cost upon assessee although there might be some element of lethargy on the part of assessee in making representation before lower authorities. However, we direct the assessee to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 9. Resultantly, these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open court on 19/02/2026 Sd/- sd/- (PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक/ Dated : 19/02/2026 Patel/Sr. PS Printed from counselvise.com Anil Turakhia ITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025- AYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Page 9 of 9 Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSenior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "