KAMLESHKUMAR BABALAL SHAH,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 1 GANDHINAGAR, GANDHINAGAR

ITA 2461/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah, the appellant, contesting the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, regarding the assessment order for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appellant faced disallowances under section 14A and additions regarding outstanding sundry creditors, which significantly increased the assessed income. The appeals were initially dismissed due to procedural issues, including non-responsiveness and technical glitches in filing. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found merit in providing a final opportunity to the appellant to present his case on merits, emphasizing the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833526 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Rule 8D
• Section: 143(3); 14A

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah 430, Panchratna Opera House, Mumbai Maharashtra-400004 PAN: AFXPS4908R (Appellant) Vs Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Amit Jhaveri, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Alpesh Parmer, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 29-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 03-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER: T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal in ITA No. 2461/Ahd/2025 is filed by the Assessee as against appellate order dated 14-10-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19. ITA Nos: 2461 & 2476/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A Nos. 2461 & 2476/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah Vs. ITO 2 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee filed his Return of Income admitting total income of Rs. 66,10,100/-. During the assessment proceedings, the A.O. made disallowance u/s. 14A of Rs.66.11,080/- and addition on account of outstanding Sundry Creditors being treated as liability no more payable of Rs.33,72,05,045/-. Thus Ld. A.O. determined the total income as Rs.35,01,26,230/- by completing assessment order u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 31-05- 2021. 3. The assessee filed appeal against the assessment order electronically on 30-06-2021 but due to technical glitches on the Income Tax portal, the same could not be uploaded. Therefore the assessee filed physical appeal and send a copy by email on 30-06- 2021. When again the assessee tried to upload the appeal in I.T. portal, it was successful on 10-08-2021 with Acknowledgement No. 265741690100821. Without knowing the uploading again the assessee uploaded on 21-01-2022 with Acknowledgement No. 958473480210122. Thus mistakenly two separate appeals were uploaded by the assessee. 4. Ld. CIT(A) treated the second appeal is with a delay by 204 days thereby without giving opportunity to the assessee dismissed the appeal vide order dated 14-10-2025, which is in appeal before us in ITA No. 2461/Ahd/2025. As against the first appeal filed before Ld. CIT(A), the assessee was sent four hearing notices between 18-04- 2024 to 02-06-2025. Since the assessee failed to response to the hearing notices, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution vide his order dated 10-06-2025, which is in appeal before us in ITA Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A Nos. 2461 & 2476/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah Vs. ITO 3 No. 2476/Ahd/2025 with the delay of 103 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 5. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No. 2461/Ahd/2025 are as follows: GOA No.1 Opportunity of Hearing: The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC neither given any proper opportunity of hearing nor considered the fact that the assesee had already filed an manual appeal because of technical glitches on the IT portal which prevented E Filing of the said appeal Without considering the said facts the Ld. CIT(A) simply dismissed the appeal on account of delay in filing the said appeal. GOA No.2 Disallowance u/s 14A worth Rs 66,11,080/-: The Ld. CIT(A) not justified in confirming the addition made by the Ld. ITO by Invoked Rule 8D and made an addition of Rs. 66,11,080/- without properly taking into consideration the detailed reply in response to the show cause notice, filed by the assessee on 08 April 2021 as well as the representation made through video conferencing on 19.04.2021. GOA No. 3. Addition on account of Outstanding Balance of Sundry Creditors treated as no more payable worth Rs 33,72,05,045/- The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the said addition made by the Ld. ITO on account of outstanding sundry balance considered the same as no more payable. GOA No.4 Interest U/s. 234A, 234B, 234C 3.1 The Ld. ITO WARD 18(2)(1) has levied interest U/s 234A, 234B, 234C of Income Tax Act 1961 on taxes. GOA No 5: We hereby reserve our right to add, amend or alter anything stated herein above or may be stated herein after. 6. The Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee in ITA No. 2476/Ahd/2025 are as follows: GOA No.1 Opportunity of Hearing: The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC erred in dismissing the said appeal on account of non attendance in the instant appeal. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A Nos. 2461 & 2476/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah Vs. ITO 4 The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC not considered the fact that two parallel appellate proceedings were going on at the same time for a single Assessment Order dated 31/05/2021. The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC not considered the fact assessee has been regularly attending in the second appellate proceedings. GOA No.2 Disallowance u/s 14A worth Rs 66,11,080/-: The Ld. CIT(A) not justified in confirming the addition made by the Ld. ITO by invoked Rule 8D and made an addition of Rs. 66,11,080/- without properly taking into consideration the detailed reply in response to the show cause notice, filed by the assessee on 08 April 2021 as well as the representation made through video conferencing on 19.04.2021 GOA No. 3. Addition on account of Outstanding Balance of Sundry Creditors treated as no more payable worth Rs 33,72,05,045/- The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the said addition made by the Ld. ITO on account of outstanding sundry balance considered the same as no more payable. GOA No 4: Merger of both Appeals: As there are two separate Appeal Order been passed for the same Assessment Order dated 31/05/2021 and there are two appeal been filed before the Hon'ble ITAT, the assessee hereby craves that hearing for both the appeal be merged and held at the same date. GOA No.5 Interest U/s. 234A, 234B, 234C 3.1 The Ld. ITO WARD 18(2)(1) has levied interest U/s 234A, 234B, 234C of Income Tax Act 1961 on taxes. GOA No 6: We hereby reserve our right to add, amend or alter anything stated herein above or may be stated herein after. 7. Ld. Counsel explained that because of two appellate orders, the assessee though filed appeal against the order dated 14-10-2025 and there is a delay in filing the second appeal order dated 10-06-2025 with the delay of 105 days. However pleaded that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to explain its case on merits before Ld. CIT(A). Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A Nos. 2461 & 2476/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah Vs. ITO 5 8. Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue has no serious objection in setting-aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A). 9. Considering the submissions of the assessee and the submission of the Revenue, we hereby condone the delay of 105 days in filing the appeal in ITA No. 2476/Ahd/2025. Since it is an exparte order before Ld. CIT(A), in the interest of Principal of Natural Justice, we deem it fit to set-aside the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the appeal on merits of the case. Needless to state that the assessee should make use of this final opportunity and produce all necessary details before Ld. CIT(A) to pass order on merits of the case. 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No. 2476/Ahd/2025 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. 11. Since ITA No. 2461/Ahd/2025 is against the second order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the very same assessment year 2018-19, being a duplicate appeal, no orders required to be passed in ITA No. 2461/Ahd/2025 and is hereby dismissed as infructuous. 12. In the combined result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No. 2476/Ahd/2025 is treated as allowed for statistical purpose and ITA No. 2461/Ahd/2025 is hereby dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 03-02-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER True Copy JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 03/02/2026 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A Nos. 2461 & 2476/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Kamleshkumar Babalal Shah Vs. ITO 6 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद Printed from counselvise.com "