DILIPKUMAR SHYAMLAL MURJANI,AHMEDABAD V. ITO, WARD 7(2)(1), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1562/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Dilipkumar Shyamlal Murjani, the appellant, contesting an order from the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which dismissed his appeal as non-maintainable due to a significant delay in filing. The delay was attributed to the appellant not receiving the intimation under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, which led to an unrecognized addition of Rs. 30,00,000 under the head 'Capital Gains'. The CIT(A) rejected the appeal without considering the merits, citing the delay as unjustified. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not provided an adequate opportunity for the appellant to be heard and that there were genuine reasons for the delay, including attempts to resolve the issue through the PMO on the CPGRAM portal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 780626 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 08-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJIV GARG
• Assessee Lawyers: VIPUL GOHIL
• Keywords: Cost of acquisition; Capital Gains

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1562/Ahd/2025 (िनधा[रण वष[ / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Dilipkumar Shyamlal Murjani Shree Ganesh Traders, F- 304, Tulip Citadel, Nr. Shreyas Foundation, Manekbaug Hall Road, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad, Gujarat – 380015 बनाम/ Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward -7(2)(1), Ahmedabad Öथायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ATRPM9288Q (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथȸ ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Vipul Gohil, AR Ĥ×यथȸ कȧ ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Rajiv Garg, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 29/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement 08/10/2025 (आदेश)/ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), ADDL/JCIT (A)-7, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”), dated 11.06.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1562/Ahd/2025 [Dilipkumar Shyamlal Murjani vs. ITO] A.Y. 2016-17 - 2 – 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. The Lrd. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts in rejecting the appeal on the ground of delay and refusing to condone the same, without appreciating that the delay was due to genuine and sufficient cause beyond the control of the Appellant, and further erred in not adjudicating the appeal on merits, thereby upholding an incorrect addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- under the head 'Capital Gains made in the Intimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act without considering the cost of acquisition of the asset.” 3. The solitary grievance of the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is in not entertaining the assessee’s appeal, dismissing it as non-maintainable by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal before him. The assessee’s appeal was delayed in filing before the Ld. CIT(A) by 2284 days. The assessee had explained the reason for the delay as having not received intimation u/s.143(1) of the Act. The said intimation was given only after many mails and appeal addressed to the PMO on CPGRAM portal. The assessee had contended that in the intimation made u/s.143(1) of the Act, addition was made under the head ‘capital gain’ of Rs.30 Lakhs though no gain was earned by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(A), we have noted, held that there was no sufficient cause adduced by the assessee in filing the appeal with a delay of 2284 days. The assessee’s reason for the delay as waiting for action on the response filed by the assessee, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1562/Ahd/2025 [Dilipkumar Shyamlal Murjani vs. ITO] A.Y. 2016-17 - 3 – he stated, was not a valid reason and the assessee ought to have taken timely action. 4. We have gone through the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and have noted that he has given no opportunity of hearing to the assessee while dismissing its appeal as non-maintainable. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) reveals that only one notice of hearing was issued to the assessee on 1st March, 2024 and thereafter, order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the assessee’s appeal as non-maintainable on account of delay in filing of the appeal. Further the assessee before us has filed evidences for pursuing the matter of receipt of intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act by filing mails and appeals to the PMO on CPGRAM. Therefore, there appears to be genuine reason with the assessee for the delay. We have also noted from the intimation made in the case of the assessee that the addition on account of capital gain has been made in the hands of the assessee by not giving the benefit of indexation of cost of acquisition to the asset sold, that too without assigning any reason. 5. Considering the above facts and circumstances, where the assessees appeal has been dismissed as non-maintainable without giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee, resulting in confirmation of addition made to the income without palpably assigning any reasons, interest of justice demands the assessee to be given another opportunity of hearing before the Ld.CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1562/Ahd/2025 [Dilipkumar Shyamlal Murjani vs. ITO] A.Y. 2016-17 - 4 – 6. We consider it fit therefore to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate both the maintainability of the appeal and also the merits of the appeal if considered necessary. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced on 08/10/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 08/10/2025 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश कȧ Ĥितिलǒप अĒेǒषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथȸ / The Appellant 2. Ĥ×यथȸ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƠ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƠ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. ǒवभागीय Ĥितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड[ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "