BHAVANJI JUGAJI THAKOR,AHMEDABAD V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

MA 131/AHD/2024

AI Insights

This case involves Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor, the appellant, contesting an order by the Income Tax Officer, Ward \\u2013 3(3)(1), Ahmedabad, concerning the assessment year 2016-17. The appellant filed a Miscellaneous Application against the Tribunal's earlier decision, claiming that their arguments and relevant case laws were overlooked. The Tribunal recognized the oversight and directed a recall of the previous order, emphasizing the need to consider all cited precedents and arguments in the reassessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34375 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bahaichand H. Gandhi, Commissioner of Income tax vs. Ms. Mayawati, Smt. Madhu Raitani vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Mehul V. Vyas vs. Income Tax Officer 23(2)(3), Mumbai, Babbal Bhatia vs. ITO, Narendra Chandubhai vs. The ITO, Dattani and Co. vs. ITO
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J.L. BHATIA
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH CHHAJED
• Section: 68

Judgement Text

"M.A. No.131/Ahd/2024 (In ITA No.974/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor vs. ITO Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No.131/Ahd/2024 (In ITA No.974/Ahd/2023) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor, 104, Anvaya Tower, Near Torrent Power Substation, Vejalpur, Ahmedabad – 380 051. [PAN – AKEPT 0862 H] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward – 3(3)(1), Ahmedabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Mahesh Chhajed, AR Revenue by Shri J.L. Bhatia, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement 02.01.2025 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This Miscellaneous Application is filed by the applicant, i.e. the assessee, in respect of order dated 08.08.2024 passed by the Tribunal. 2. The Ld. AR submitted that during the course of hearing of the appeal on 04.06.2024 the Ld. AR relied upon the various decisions wherein it is held that Section 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be invoked only when books of account are maintained. These case laws are as under :- “1. Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Bahaichand H. Gandhi (1983) 141 ITR 0067 2. Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Commissioner of Income tax vs. Ms. Mayawati (2011) 338 ITR 563 (Del) M.A. No.131/Ahd/2024 (In ITA No.974/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor vs. ITO Page 2 of 3 3. Hon’ble ITAT Gauhati Bench (Thid Member) in the case of Smt. Madhu Raitani vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3 [2011] 45 SOT 231 (Gauhati) (TM) 4. Hon’ble ITAT Mumbai in the case of Mehul V. Vyas vs. Income Tax Officer 23(2)(3), Mumbai [2017] 80 taxmann.com 311 (Mumbai – Trib.) 5. Hon’ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Babbal Bhatia vs. ITO (ITA No.5430 & 5432/Del/2011) 6. Hon’ble ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of Narendra Chandubhai vs. The ITO (ITA No.103/Ahd/2019).” 3. The Ld. AR submitted that in spite of detailed argument by the AR, however, in the order not a single contention of the AR was considered and also overlooked the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court as well as Tribunals while passing the order. Therefore, the Ld. AR submitted that as per the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dattani and Co. vs. ITO [2014] 41 taxmann.com 360 wherein it is held that whevever any decision has been relied upon and/or cited by assessee and/or any party, Tribunal is bound to consider and/or deal with the same and opine whether in facts and circumstances of particular case, the same will be applicable or not. 4. The Ld. DR relied upon the order of the Tribunal and submitted that the assessee is seeking review of the order dated 08.08.2024. 5. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. The contention of the ld. AR that Section 68 cannot be invoked when the assessee has not prepared books of account has been considered in the opening of the paragraph no.7 itself. The contention of the ld. AR that the decisions of Hon’ble Bombay High Court and various Hon’ble High Courts including that of Tribunals was not considered is not justifiable as the factual aspect of assessee’s case explained in paragraph no.7 but the mention of the case laws in the finding appears to be missing and, therefore, the order dated 08.08.2024 passed by the Tribunal needs to be recalled. Registry is directed to place the ITA No.974/Ahd/2023 for fresh hearing on 17.01.2025. Notice to be given to both the parties accordingly. 6. Thus, the present Miscellaneous Application is allowed. M.A. No.131/Ahd/2024 (In ITA No.974/Ahd/2023 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Bhavanji Jugaji Thakor vs. ITO Page 3 of 3 7. In the result, this Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 2nd January, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Accountant Member Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 2nd January, 2025 PBN/* Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad "