ARUN GOPILAL SAMNANI,AHMEDABAD V. CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURIS.ITO, WARD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

MA 120/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Arun Gopilal Samnani, the appellant, who filed a Miscellaneous Application against the Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad, concerning the assessment year 2021-22. The appellant contested the dismissal of his appeal by the Tribunal, which was initially dismissed due to an alleged short payment of the Tribunal fee. The appellant argued that the correct fee was paid and that there was no change in the assessed income compared to the returned income. The Tribunal found that the appellant was not given an adequate opportunity to respond to the reminders sent by the registry, which led to the dismissal of the appeal. Consequently, the Tribunal recalled the earlier order and directed the case to be heard regularly.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839698 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 03-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: DR. BRR Kumar, Vice President And Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Arun Gopilal Samnani 7, Bank of Baroda Society, Nr. P.T. College, Paldi, Ahmedabad- PAN No: AYWPS2887D (Appellant) Vs CPC, Bangalore Present Jurisdiction: Income Tax Officer Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Biren Shah, A.R. Revenue Represented : Shri Abhijit, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 19-12-2025 Date of pronouncement : 24-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the Assessee that the assessee paid correct Tribunal appeal fee of Rs.500/- as per Section 253(6)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, since there is no change in the returned income and that of the assessed income, whereas the appeal was dismissed for short payment of Tribunal Fee of Rs.8712/-. Therefore requested to recall the same. 2. We have perused the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee. The assessee claims that no opportunity of hearing was M.A. No: 120/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No: 1540/Ahd/2025) Assessment Year: 2021-22 Printed from counselvise.com M..A No. 120/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No. 1540/Ahd/2025) A.Y. 2021-22 Arun Gopilal Samnani vs. ITO 2 granted to the assessee which is not correct. Whereas the registry itself sent two reminders on 03-09-2025 and 18-09-2025 which was not responded by the assessee Counsel. It is thereafter, the appeal was listed for hearing on 12-11-2025. On that day the assessee Representative not appeared before this Tribunal, whereas a Proxy counsel represented the case but could not explain the details about the case. Therefore the appeal was dismissed for short payment of Tribunal Fees. 3. Since now not it is explained by the assessee that there is no change in the assessed income with that of the returned income, impugned order dated 13-11-2025 is hereby recalled and the main case is directed to be posted for regular hearing in due course. 4. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 24-02-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) VICE PRESIDENT True Copy JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 24/02/2026 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) Printed from counselvise.com M..A No. 120/Ahd/2025 (in ITA No. 1540/Ahd/2025) A.Y. 2021-22 Arun Gopilal Samnani vs. ITO 3 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद Printed from counselvise.com "