Rameshbhai Manibhai Patel, Nadiad V. The ITO, Ward-4, Nadiad

ITA 24/AHD/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0364 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 4 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC-3
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MEHUL K. PATEL
• Keywords: Business income; Salary income; Capital Gains

Judgement Text

ITA No.24/Ahd/2021 A.Y. 2016-17 Page 1 of 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC-3” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, VICE PRESIDENT AND Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.24/Ahd/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Rameshbhai Manibhai Patel, vs. The Income Tax Officer, 7, Friends Park Society, Ward – 4, Nadiad. Nr. Sunrise Park, Petlad Road, Nadiad – 387 002. [PAN – ADKPP 4109Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mehul K. Patel, AR Respondent by : Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. DR Date of hearing : 29.07.2022 Date of pronouncement : 05.08.2022 O R D E R PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 20.09.2019 passed by the CIT(A)-2, Vadodara for the Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in law, and on facts, in not providing reasonable and sufficient opportunity of hearing and in deciding the appeal ex-parte. 2. That the learned CIT(A) has grievously erred in law in dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution instead of adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merits. 3. That on facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) be directed to decide the ground on merits regarding the addition of Rs.2,80,000/- made by the AO by disallowing the claim of deduction u/s.80GGC of the Act.” ITA No.24/Ahd/2021 A.Y. 2016-17 Page 2 of 3 3. The assessee filed return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 on 25.05.2016 declaring total income of Rs.9,04,322/-. During the year under consideration the assessee derived income from salary, income from other sources and capital gains. The case was selected under CASS for the reason being receipt of large value foreign remittance and low business income. The assessee filed its submissions/reply which was rejected by the Assessing Officer and made addition of Rs.2,80,000/- in respect of donation to political party under Section 80GGC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex-parte without deciding the same on merit. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that there is delay of 29 days which may be condoned as the assessee could not file appeal before the CIT(A) due to lock down amidst the Covid-19 pandemic. Ld. AR further submitted that the CIT(A) has not decided the case on merit and has not given proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee as the notices were not received by the assessee within the due time as the assessee was absent from Indian address as he was residing with his sister at a small town called Bordi which is about 40 Kms. away from Nadiad. Thus, the Ld. AR submitted that the matter may be remanded back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the matter on merit. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. It is pertinent to note that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order without adjudicating the issues raised before the CIT(A) by the assessee. In the interest of justice, it will be appropriate to remand back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues contested by the assessee on merit. Needless to ITA No.24/Ahd/2021 A.Y. 2016-17 Page 3 of 3 say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on this 5 th day of August, 2022. Sd/- Sd/- (P.M. JAGTAP) (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) Vice President Judicial Member Ahmedabad, the 5 th day of August, 2022 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