HARISH CHANDRA GAVLI,INDORE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHABUA

ITA 274/IND/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Harish Chandra Gavli, the appellant, who contested an ex-parte assessment order under sections 144/147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2011-12. The appellant faced delays in filing both the first appeal and the current appeal due to personal hardships, including the death of his wife and his own health issues. The ITAT considered these circumstances as sufficient cause for the delays. Both parties agreed that the matter should be remanded back to the AO for a proper hearing, emphasizing the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 773148 (ITAT-INDORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 13-03-2025
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: FORASSESSEESUBMITTEDTHATTHEASSESSEEHASFILEDAN; FORREVENUELEFTTHEMATTERTOTHE; FORREVENUEAGREESWITHTHEPRAYEROFLD.ARBUTMAKESA; SHRIASHISHPORWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRIRAM GILDA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

"Page 1 of 4 आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, इंदौरɊायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.274/Ind/2025 Assessment Year:2011-12 Harish Chandra Gavli, 1, Sajjan Road, Rohidas Marg, Jhabua बनाम/ Vs. ITO, Jhabua (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) PAN: AWGPG5543G Assessee by Shri Ram Gilda, AR Revenue by Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement 23.09.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.: Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 31.12.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 20.11.2018 passed by learned ITO, Jhabua [“AO”] u/s 144/147 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2011-12, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds mentioned in Appeal Memo (Form No. 36). Printed from counselvise.com Harish Chandra Gavli ITA No. 274/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12 Page 2 of 4 2. There is a small delay of 13 days in filing present appeal before ITAT. Further, there was also a delay of 133 days in filing first-appeal before CIT(A). Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit on stamp. Referring to same, Ld. AR submitted that the email id registered in department record and also fetched in Form No. 35 filed to CIT(A) is [e-mail] which belongs to assessee’s counsel but asessee’s counsel never informed the assessee about the proceedings due to which the assessee could neither respond to the notices of hearings nor file respective appeals in time. Ld. AR further submitted that the assessee’s wife “Smt. Shanti Satogiya” expired on 06.07.2018 at an early age of 48 years due to cancer, copy of death certificate is filed. Further, the assessee is also a patient of triple vessel cardiac disease, copies of medical documents are filed. Thus, the assessee is facing difficult challenges which also contributed in taking timely actions. Ld. AR very humbly submitted that there is no lethargy, negligence, mala fide intention or ulterior motive of assessee in making delay and the assessee does not stand to derive any benefit because of delay. He submitted that there is “sufficient cause” for delay and hence the delay should be condoned. Ld. DR for Revenue left the matter to the wisdom of Bench without raising any objection. We have considered the explanation advanced by assessee and in absence of any contrary fact or material on record, the assessee is found to have a “sufficient cause” for delay in filing present appeal. We find that section 253(5) of the Act Printed from counselvise.com Harish Chandra Gavli ITA No. 274/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12 Page 3 of 4 empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time. It is also a settled position by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353, 1987 2 SCC 387 that whenever substantial justice and technical considerations are opposed to each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred by adopting a justice-oriented approach. Thus, taking into account the facts of case, the provision of section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3. On merit of case, Ld. AR submitted that the AO’s order is also ex-parte u/s 144 due to non-representation by assessee. However, the assessee is ready and willing to make a proper representation before AO if an opportunity is given and prays that the present matter should be remanded to the file of AO for a proper adjudication. 4. Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent his case before AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments. 5. In view of above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matter is restored at the level of AO, we remand this matter back to the file of AO for adjudication afresh, at the risk Printed from counselvise.com Harish Chandra Gavli ITA No. 274/Ind/2025 - AY 2011-12 Page 4 of 4 and responsibility of assessee. The AO shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass an appropriate order uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by AO and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the AO shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. 6. Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in open court on 23/09/2025 Sd/- Sd/- (PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Indore िदनांक/Dated : 23/09/2025 Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore Printed from counselvise.com "