JIGNESHKUMAR TAKHATSINH VAGHELA,GANDHINAGAR V. THE ITO, WARD 1(2)(1), VADODARA

ITA 1814/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Jigneshkumar Takhetsinh Vaghela, who appealed against the orders of the Income Tax Officer (ITO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the assessment year 2012-13. The primary contention was the addition of Rs.14,62,000 to his income, which was attributed to unexplained cash deposits in his bank account. The ITO had reopened the case under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and passed an ex-parte re-assessment order due to the non-appearance of the assessee. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte as well, leading to the assessee's appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after considering the new evidence presented by the assessee, including a bank passbook and cash book, allowed the appeal, thereby reversing the earlier decisions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 835329 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KETAKI DESAI
• Assessee Lawyers: P.B. PARMAR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Initiation of penalty proceedings
• Section: 147; 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT & SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1814/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 ) Jigneshkumar Takhetsinh Vaghela Plot No.583/2, Sector 4 C Bear Goga Naharaj Temple Gandhinagar – 382 006 [PAN: AGCPV 2135 R] Vs. The ITO Ward-1(2)(1) Vadodara – 390 007 (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri P.B. Parmar, AR Respondent by: Ms. Ketaki Desai, Sr.DR Date of Hearing 10/02/2016 Date of Pronouncement 11/02/2016 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay condoned. This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 17/12/2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] relating to the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both in law and on facts, in passing ex-parte order which is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, action of reopening the case under section 147 of the Act is not justified in the eye of law. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1814/Ahd/2025 Jigneshkumar Takhatsinh Vagjhela vs. ITO AY : 2012-13 2 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both in law and on facts, in confirming addition of Rs.14,62,000/- made under section 69A of the Act in respect of deposits in the bank account. 4. Both, AO & CIT(A), have erred in passing the impugned orders without properly appreciating facts of the case, submissions of the assessee and documentary evidences available on record in the correct perspective. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming levy of interest u/s. 234A/B/C/D of the Act. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming action of initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. 7. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, edit, delete, modify or change all or any of the grounds of appeal at the time of or before the hearing of the appeal.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and did not file his return of income. The case was reopened u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short “the Act”) on the ground that cash deposit of Rs.14,62,000/- made in the Savings Bank Account of the assessee with State Bank of India, Infocity, Gandhinagar Branch. In spite of service of notices, the assessee failed to appear, which has resulted in passing the ex-parte re-assessment order assessing the total income of Rs.14,62,000/-. 4. Aggrieved assessee, filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and produced bank statement, however, neither appeared nor filed any written submission before the Ld. CIT(A), which has resulted in dismissing the appeal ex-parte. 5. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the records, it is observed that despite of repeated notices, the assessee did not furnish any submission, information or documents or requisite details or explanations before the Ld. AO. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), based on the material available on record, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted all necessary details along with Affidavit, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1814/Ahd/2025 Jigneshkumar Takhatsinh Vagjhela vs. ITO AY : 2012-13 3 clarifications, and explanations. The assessee has proved the genuineness of the cash deposits along with documentary evidences, such as, Bank pass-book, copy of cash book, etc. Hence, we are declined to uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and allow the appeal of the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. The order is pronounced in the open Court on 11/02/2026 Sd Sd Sd Sd/ / / /- - - - Sd/ Sd/ Sd/ Sd/- - - - ( ( ( (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ) ) ) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE VICE VICE VICE- - - -PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 11/02/2026 tc nair आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\u0007 / The Appellant 2. \b थ\u0007 / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0015 / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु\u0015(अपील) / The CIT(A)- (NFAC). Delhi 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, True Copy //True Copy// सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation 15.01.2026 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 10.02.2026 3. Other Member 10.02.2026 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 11.2.26 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 11.2.26 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………………………………... 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order 10. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "