HARSHABEN VRAJLAL RAJANI,WANKANER V. THE ITO WARD -1, MORBI, MORBI

ITA 961/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Harshaben Vrajlal Rajani against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on 10.11.2025, which itself arose from an earlier order by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 29.12.2019. The primary issue in the appeal was the absence of the assessee during the hearings, leading to an ex-parte and non-speaking order by the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted the violation of the principles of natural justice and fair play, which necessitate that an affected party be granted a sufficient opportunity to contest their case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829145 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Rajkot
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 29-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV; LD.
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोटɊायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 961/RJT/2025 (Ǔनधा[रणवष[/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr Date of Hearing : 13/01/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 13/01/2026 ORDER Per.Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Accountant Member: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2017- 18, is directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), dated 10.11.2025, which in turn arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act, on 29.12.2019. 2. None appeared on the date of hearing before the Bench, despite of issuance of notice of hearing to the assessee, on the address mentioned in Form No. 36. It means the assessee is not interested in prosecuting this appeal. Harshaben Vrajlal Rajani Amarsar, Sheri No 1, Pratap Para, Wankaner 363621, Gujarat, India Vs. Addl/JCIT (A)-1 Chennai Tamil Nadu èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: BQEPR6583E (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 961/Rjt/2025 Harshaben Vrajlal Rajani 3. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue, argued that assessee did not appear before Ld. CIT(A) therefore, Ld. DR did not have any objection, if the matter is restored back to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 4. I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 143(3) 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 merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. 5. 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. 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 Ld. CIT(A) 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 ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 961/Rjt/2025 Harshaben Vrajlal Rajani Order is pronounced in the open court on 13/01/2026 Sd/- (DR. A. L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 13 /01/2026 Copy of the order forwarded to: The assessee The Respondent CIT The CIT(A) DR, ITAT, RAJKOT Guard File By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot Printed from counselvise.com "