BHARTABHAI DER,JETPUR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AAYKAR BHAVAN

ITA 856/RJT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Bharatbhai Der, an agriculturalist, who appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) which was based on an earlier order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was that the assessee was not served notices of hearing and thus could not represent his case, leading to an ex-parte order. Additionally, the assessee argued that he was not required to pay advance tax as his income was exempt being an agriculturalist. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to present his case, which constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 312172 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: SUMIT SHINGALA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"ITA NO. 856/Rjt/2024 A.Y 17-18 Bharatbhai Der Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH(SMC), RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.856/RJT/2024 Ǔनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Hearing) Bharatbhai Der, At Village: Khajuri Gundala, Jetpur, Dist. Rajkot 364 485 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 1(2)(3), Rajkot, Aaykar Bhawan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot 360 001 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: CFPPD 5240 F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sumit Shingala, AR Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11/03/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 29/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Dr. ARJUNLAL SAINI AM; Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2017-18, is directed against the order passed by Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [in short “the Ld.CIT(A)”] vide order dated 28.12.2023, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer, dated 15.10.2019, u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). 2. 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 ITA NO. 856/Rjt/2024 A.Y 17-18 Bharatbhai Der Page | 2 assessee, also submitted that ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, simply on the reason that assessee did not pay the advance tax, however, the assessee is an agriculturalist, whose income is exempted from tax, therefore, he need not to deposit the advance tax. 3. 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, appeal of the assessee should be dismissed at this stage only. 4. 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 non-speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. 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. The Assessee is an agriculturalist, therefore, he need not to pay the advance tax on his exempted income. 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 ITA NO. 856/Rjt/2024 A.Y 17-18 Bharatbhai Der Page | 3 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 Officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 29/04/2025. Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) लेखा सदÖय/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट /Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 29/04/2025 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 "