BHARATKUMAR BAVACHANDBHAI BHUVA,JETPUR V. ITO WARD 1(2)(5), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 380/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Bharatkumar Bavachandbhai Bhuva, against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2012-13 and challenges the additions made on account of long-term capital gains amounting to Rs. 4,36,735. The primary contention was the ex-parte nature of the appellate order and the non-compliance with the mandatory DIN requirement as per CBDT Circular No. 19/2019. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to present his case, leading to a violation of the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792925 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DHEERAJ KUMR GUPTA; LD
• Assessee Lawyers: GAURANG KHAKHAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Fair market value; Principle of natural justice; Non passing of speaking order
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं Ǔनधा[रण वष[ Bharatkumar Bavachandbhai Bhuva Jamadar Wadi, Bi Shriji Vidyala, Jetpur, Rajkot, Gujarat 360380 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) Ǔनधा[ǐरतीकȧओरसे/Assessee by राजèवकȧओरसे/Revenue by सुनवाईकȧतारȣख/Date of Hearing घोषणाकȧतारȣख/Date of Pronouncement Per,Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM Captioned appeal filed by 2012-13, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)[hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 19.05.2025, which in turn arises out of Assessing Officer u/s 144 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as 1. “ The impugned Ex-parte Appellate Order u/s. 250 of the Act dated 19th May, 2025 passed by the Ld. Additional /JCIT (A) and circumstances of the case आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोटɊायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.380/RJT/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[/Assessment Year :2012-13 Bavachandbhai madar Wadi, Bi Shriji Vidyala, 360380 बनाम/ Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2)(5),Rajkot जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: CQOPB2856B ) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Gaurang Khakhar, AR Revenue by : Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr Date of Hearing : 10/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 22/09/2025 आदेश/Order Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year , is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)[hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by 144 of the Act, on 09.11.2019. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: parte Appellate Order u/s. 250 of the Act dated 19th May, 2025 passed by the Ld. Additional /JCIT (A)-7, Kolkata is opposed to law, facts and circumstances of the case IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Respondent) Sr-DR 5 5 pertaining to Assessment Year , is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)[hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”], order passed by parte Appellate Order u/s. 250 of the Act dated 19th May, 7, Kolkata is opposed to law, facts Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 380/Rjt/2025 Bharatkumar B. Bhuva Page | 2 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment as the same is in violation of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 requiring mandatory DIN. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition on account of LTCG of Rs. 4,36,735/- by passing Ex of appeal on merits of the case. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,36,735/ ground of non-compliance of Hearing Notices issued without appreciating the fact the Appellant was not aware of such Notices. 5. The Ld. Additional /JCIT (A) confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in the addition of an amount of Rs. 4,36,735/-being the FMV of Property as long term capital gain without being referring the matter to the Ld. DVO 6. That the order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s.250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was arbitrary, bad in law and unjust. 7. That the assessee craves leave to urge such other ground or grounds before or at the time of hearing of appeal.” 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that order passed by the assessing officer assessing officer. On appeal passed the order ex-parte Ld. Counsel submitted that now the assessee is ready to submit details documents before the assessing officer evidence also,therefore, the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 4. On the other hand, Ld. DR for the Revenue the matter is to be remitted back to the file of the 5. I have heard both the parties. consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 14 impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an speaking order, therefore, On the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order is null and void as the same is in violation of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 requiring mandatory The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition on account of LTCG of Rs. by passing Ex-parte Appellate Order without adjudicating the of appeal on merits of the case. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,36,735/ compliance of Hearing Notices issued without appreciating the fact the Appellant was not aware of such Notices. ditional /JCIT (A)-7, Kolkata has grossly erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in the addition of an amount of Rs. being the FMV of Property as long term capital gain without being referring the matter to the Ld. DVO for the purpose of valuation. That the order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s.250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was arbitrary, bad in law and unjust. That the assessee craves leave to urge such other ground or grounds before or at time of hearing of appeal.” Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that order passed is an ex-parte order, as none appeared before the . On appeal, by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) has also order, as none appeared before the Ld. CIT(A). Counsel submitted that now the assessee is ready to submit details assessing officer and wants to submit some herefore, the matter may be remitted back to the for fresh adjudication. Ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any objection be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer. 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 meri order is null and void as the same is in violation of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 requiring mandatory The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition on account of LTCG of Rs. parte Appellate Order without adjudicating the grounds The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,36,735/- on the compliance of Hearing Notices issued without appreciating the 7, Kolkata has grossly erred in law and in facts in confirming the action of the Ld. A.O. in the addition of an amount of Rs. being the FMV of Property as long term capital gain without being That the order passed by the Ld. CIT u/s.250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 was arbitrary, That the assessee craves leave to urge such other ground or grounds before or at Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that order passed as none appeared before the , by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) has also before the Ld. CIT(A).The Counsel submitted that now the assessee is ready to submit details and some additional file of the have any objection, if . note that in the assessee’s case under of the Act and the order and non- do not wish to make any comments on the merits Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 380/Rjt/2025 Bharatkumar B. Bhuva Page | 3 of the grounds raised by the assessee. that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A) and assessing officer. 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. Now, the assessee wants to submit details and documents before the assessing officer. 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 case, in the interest of justice, 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 the issue afresh on merits. liberty to adduce any evidences as deemed officer at the time of assessment, proceedings in consequence to this order and the Assessing Officer shall, allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being, heard and to make relevant submissions, and then pass a speaking order which is fair and judicious. assessee is treated as allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on राजकोट /Rajkot (T िदनांक/ Date: 22/09/2025 of the grounds raised by the assessee. Considering the above facts, that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A) and assessing officer. ) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of Now, the assessee wants to submit details and documents before the assessing officer. 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 case, in the interest of justice, I 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. 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 Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. It is needless to say that the assessee will be at liberty to adduce any evidences as deemed relevant before the assessing officer at the time of assessment, proceedings in consequence to this order and the Assessing Officer shall, allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being, heard and to make relevant submissions, and then pass a speaking rder which is fair and judicious.For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. n the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22/09/2025. Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) लेखा सदÖय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER True Copy) 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) and assessing officer. I ) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of Now, the assessee wants to submit details and documents t 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 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. it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) fficer to adjudicate It is needless to say that the assessee will be at relevant before the assessing officer at the time of assessment, proceedings in consequence to this order and the Assessing Officer shall, allow the assessee adequate opportunity of being, heard and to make relevant submissions, and then pass a speaking For statistical purposes, the appeal of the n the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 380/Rjt/2025 Bharatkumar B. Bhuva Page | 4 By order/आदेश से, सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, राजकोट राजकोट Printed from counselvise.com "