ILA JIGNESHKUMAR VAKHARIA,GONDAL V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), RAJKOT

ITA 600/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ila Jignesh Kumar Vakharia, the appellant, contesting orders related to the assessment year 2015-16. The appeal was directed against the order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which arose from an assessment order under sections 147 and 144B of the Act. The primary contention was the illegal use of the appellant's bank account by a broker, leading to disputed transactions. The appellant argued that these transactions, which resulted in additions to his income, were not conducted by him but by the broker using his account without consent. The Tribunal found procedural lapses in the handling of the case by the lower authorities, particularly the lack of a proper hearing and a reasoned decision, necessitating a remand to the assessing officer for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829081 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Rajkot
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANADI DIXIT; LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: SAMIR BHUPTANI LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 68

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,राजकोट Ɋायपीठ, राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.600/RJT/2025 Ǔनधा[रण वष[/Assessment Year :2015-16 Ila Jignesh Kumar Vakharia Bagasra Road At Derdi Kumbhaji, Derdi, Gondal (Gujrat) - 364465 बनाम/ Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(2)1 IT Office, New Aaykar Bhawan, Vatika, Rajko (Gujrat) - 360001 èथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AQFPV0899R (अपीलाथȸ/Appellant) (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Samir Bhuptani Ld. AR राजèव कȧ ओर से/Revenue by : Shri Anadi Dixit, Ld. Sr-DR सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 23/10/2025 घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 15/01/2026 आदेश/ORDER Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year 2015- 16, 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) (CIT(A)'), dated 29.07.2025, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, on 14.05.2023. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as follows: 1. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in passing the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is bad in law and without appropriate jurisdiction. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 600/Rjt/2025 Ila Jignesh Kumar Vakharia Page | 2 2. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in passing the order in ex-parte, which is bad in law and without appropriate jurisdiction. 3. Ld. AO erred in law as well as on facts in reopening the assessment, which is bad in law and without appropriate jurisdiction. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the validity of the same. 4. Ld. AO erred in law as well as on facts in making addition of sum of Rs. 31,90,000/- by invoking provision of section 68 of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the same. 5. Ld. AO erred in law as well as on facts in making addition of Rs. 7,03,327/-u/s. 68 of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the same. 6. Ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on facts that account of the appellant was misused and managed by the broker and not by appellant himself and consequently the additions ought to have been made in the hands of the broker and not in the hands of the appellant. 3. At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that bank account of the assessee was used by the broker illegally and whatever transactions are there, in the bank account, belong to the Broker and not the assessee. Since the assessee could not appear before lower authorities, ( neither before the CIT(A), nor before the assessing officer) therefore, an opportunity should be given to the assessee to explain these facts before the assessing officer. Apart from this, the assessee wants to submit relevant documents and evidences to prove the fact that the bank account of the assessee was illegally used by broker without informing to the assessee, therefore matter may be restored back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 4. The ld. DR for the Revenue debarred from objecting the stand of the ld. Counsel. 5. 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 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 600/Rjt/2025 Ila Jignesh Kumar Vakharia Page | 3 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 147 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. 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 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 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. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 15/01/2026. Sd/- (Dr. Arjun Lal Saini) लेखा सदÖय/Accountant Member राजकोट /Rajkot //True Copy// िदनांक/ Date: 15/01/2026 Copy of the Order forwarded to Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 600/Rjt/2025 Ila Jignesh Kumar Vakharia Page | 4 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot Printed from counselvise.com "