KAMLESH NAGINBHAI LAD,SURAT V. ITO, WARD-3(2)(6), SURAT

ITA 589/SRT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad, the appellant, contesting an order from the CIT(A) which upheld an addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex parte, citing non-compliance by the appellant in responding to notices. However, the appellant argued that they had submitted a detailed response online, which was not considered by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had erred in dismissing the appeal without considering the appellant's submissions, leading to a decision to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 786126 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NAMITA PATEL
• Assessee Lawyers: ESMAYEEL; SAHERWALA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Source of fund

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SURAT BENCH “SMC” SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA No. 589/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad, 59 Yogeshvar Park, Near Rekha Park, Adajan, Hajira Road, Surat-395009. Vs. ITO Ward-3(2)(6) Room No. 109, 1st Floor, Income Tax Office, Anavil Business Centre, Adajan, Surat-395007. PAN NO. AAQPL 7195 K Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Mr. Esmayeel, Saherwala, CA Revenue by : Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 07/10/2025 Date of pronouncement : 30/10/2025 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 31.03.2025 passed by the Ld. Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-6, Chennai [hereinafter shall be referred as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2017-18, raising following grounds: (1) That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-6, Chennai erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal without considering the online submission of Paper Book-1 dated 31/03/2025 filed by the appellant in response to the notice under section 250 dated 24/03/2025, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and causing grave prejudice to the appellant. Printed from counselvise.com (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A) in passing the appellate order U/s.250 of the Act with a predetermined mind before awaiting the expiry of due date granted to assessee b rendering the appellate proceedings void ab initio for failure to follow due process. (3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A) upholding the addition of Rs Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Act without appreciating that appellant is a regular taxpayer with a documented history of substantial income in previous assessment years and out of his accumulated savings from disclosed into the Bank. (4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A) charging the tax as per the provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act. 2. At the very outset, the submitted that the [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] has dismissed the appeal ex parte, without duly considering the online written submission filed by the assessee in the form of a 31.03.2025, which had been uploaded on the Departmental portal in response to the notice dated 3. Upon a careful perusal of the record, we find that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal summarily on the ground of non-compliance, holding the assessee to be in default for failure to respond to the notices issued in the course of appellate proceedings. 4. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee copy of the said online submission, as placed in the paper book, ITA No. 589/SRT/2025 Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-6, CHENNAI is not justified in passing the appellate order U/s.250 of the Act with a predetermined mind before awaiting the expiry of due date granted to assessee by the former in his notice thereby rendering the appellate proceedings void ab initio for failure to follow due process. (3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-6, Chennai erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,99,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Act without appreciating that appellant is a regular taxpayer with a documented history of substantial income in previous assessment years and out of his accumulated savings from disclosed sources of income the amount was deposit into the Bank. (4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A)-6, CHENNAI has erred in charging the tax as per the provisions of Section 115BBE At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] has dismissed the appeal ex parte, without duly considering the online written submission e assessee in the form of a paper book dated which had been uploaded on the Departmental portal in response to the notice dated 25.03.2025. Upon a careful perusal of the record, we find that the has dismissed the appeal summarily on the ground of compliance, holding the assessee to be in default for failure to respond to the notices issued in the course of appellate Ld. Counsel for the assesseehas produced a y of the said online submission, as placed in the paper book, ITA No. 589/SRT/2025 2 Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and 6, CHENNAI is not justified in passing the appellate order U/s.250 of the Act with a predetermined mind before awaiting the expiry of due date y the former in his notice thereby rendering the appellate proceedings void ab initio for (3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and 6, Chennai erred in made by the Assessing Officer under section 69A of the Act without appreciating that appellant is a regular taxpayer with a documented history of substantial income in previous assessment years and out of his accumulated savings sources of income the amount was deposit (4) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and 6, CHENNAI has erred in charging the tax as per the provisions of Section 115BBE Ld. Counsel for the assessee Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as “the CIT(A)”] has dismissed the appeal ex parte, without duly considering the online written submission paper book dated which had been uploaded on the Departmental Upon a careful perusal of the record, we find that the Ld. has dismissed the appeal summarily on the ground of compliance, holding the assessee to be in default for failure to respond to the notices issued in the course of appellate has produced a y of the said online submission, as placed in the paper book, Printed from counselvise.com evidencing that detailed submissions were, in fact, filed within the prescribed period through the official portal. On a holistic consideration of the record, we find merit in the contention tha the Ld. CIT(A) has not adverted to or considered such submission while adjudicating the appeal, and the order has been passed without due appreciation of the materials and contentions placed on record. 5. It is trite law that the first appellate authorit quasi-judicial forum, is statutorily obliged under of the Income-tax Act, 1961 speaking order, after granting the assessee an effective opportunity of being heard and after considering all evidences and submissions made before it. The duty to render a reasoned decision is an essential facet of the principle of partem, which forms the bedrock of the concept of justice. 6. Guided by these judicial principles, and having regard to the facts of the present case, we are of the considered view that the order passed by the rendered in breach of the statutory mandate and principles of natural justice. We, therefore, restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) adjudicate the appeal submissions and evidences filed by the assessee and after ITA No. 589/SRT/2025 Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad evidencing that detailed submissions were, in fact, filed within the prescribed period through the official portal. On a holistic consideration of the record, we find merit in the contention tha has not adverted to or considered such submission while adjudicating the appeal, and the order has been passed without due appreciation of the materials and contentions placed It is trite law that the first appellate authorit judicial forum, is statutorily obliged under Section 250(6) tax Act, 1961 to dispose of the appeal after granting the assessee an effective opportunity of being heard and after considering all evidences nd submissions made before it. The duty to render a reasoned decision is an essential facet of the principle of which forms the bedrock of the concept of Guided by these judicial principles, and having regard to the facts of the present case, we are of the considered view that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) cannot be sustained, having been in breach of the statutory mandate and principles of We, therefore, set aside the impugned order an restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh, after duly considering the submissions and evidences filed by the assessee and after ITA No. 589/SRT/2025 3 Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad evidencing that detailed submissions were, in fact, filed within the prescribed period through the official portal. On a holistic consideration of the record, we find merit in the contention that has not adverted to or considered such submission while adjudicating the appeal, and the order has been passed without due appreciation of the materials and contentions placed It is trite law that the first appellate authority, being a Section 250(6) to dispose of the appeal by a after granting the assessee an effective opportunity of being heard and after considering all evidences nd submissions made before it. The duty to render a reasoned decision is an essential facet of the principle of audi alteram which forms the bedrock of the concept of natural Guided by these judicial principles, and having regard to the facts of the present case, we are of the considered view that the cannot be sustained, having been in breach of the statutory mandate and principles of the impugned order and with a direction to after duly considering the submissions and evidences filed by the assessee and after Printed from counselvise.com affording adequate opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, Ground No. 1 statistical purposes, and since the matter has been restored for fresh consideration, the remaining grounds on merits are not adjudicated at this stage, being rendered consequential. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced 30/10/2025. Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN JUDICIAL MEMBER Surat; Dated: 30/10/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S. (on Tour) Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Surat 5. Guard file. //True Copy// ITA No. 589/SRT/2025 Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad affording adequate opportunity of hearing in accordance with Ground No. 1 of the appeal is , and since the matter has been restored for fresh consideration, the remaining grounds on merits are not adjudicated at this stage, being rendered academic and In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of ITAT Rules - Sd/ (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (OM PRAKASH KANT JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Surat ITA No. 589/SRT/2025 4 Kamlesh Naginbhai Lad affording adequate opportunity of hearing in accordance with of the appeal is allowed for , and since the matter has been restored for fresh consideration, the remaining grounds on merits are not academic and In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for under Rule 34(4) of ITAT Rules on Sd/- OM PRAKASH KANT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BY ORDER, (Assistant Registrar) ITAT, Surat Printed from counselvise.com "