KARNAVATI DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1386/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Karnavati Developers Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an ex-parte order from the CIT(A) regarding the Assessment Year 2017-18. The appellant raised several grounds, primarily challenging the ex-parte nature of the CIT(A)'s order and the additions made to their income, which included a reduction in Work In Progress (WIP) and unexplained bank credits. The tribunal noted that the appellant was not properly notified of the proceedings due to an error in the email address used for communication, which led to their absence in the hearings. Consequently, the tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792906 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 30-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: HARDIK VORA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" IN IN IN IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL TRIBUNAL “ “ “ “B B B B” ” ” ” BENCH, BENCH, BENCH, BENCH, AHMEDABAD AHMEDABAD AHMEDABAD AHMEDABAD BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE BEFORE DR. B DR. B DR. B DR. B. . . .R R R R. . . .R R R R. . . . KUMAR KUMAR KUMAR KUMAR, , , , VICE VICE VICE VICE- - - -PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, , , , JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1386/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Karnavati Developers Pvt. Ltd., 1st Floor, Nirav Complex, Nr. Navrang High School, Naranpura, Ahmedabad-380013 [PAN :AACCK 7148 J] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1)(2), Ahmedabad (Appellant Appellant Appellant Appellant) .. (Respondent Respondent Respondent Respondent) Appellant by : Appellant by : Appellant by : Appellant by : Shri Hardik Vora, Advocate Respondent by Respondent by Respondent by Respondent by: : : : Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing Date of Hearing Date of Hearing Date of Hearing 17.09.2025 Date of Pronouncement Date of Pronouncement Date of Pronouncement Date of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 O R D E R O R D E R O R D E R O R D E R PER PER PER PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE- - - -PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT PRESIDENT: : : :- - - - Delay condoned. Delay condoned. Delay condoned. Delay condoned. This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order dated 05.02.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’ in short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ in short), relating to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity of being heard. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing an ex-parte order without discussing grounds on merits. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1386/Ahd/2025 Karnavati Developers Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 2– 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that assessee was unaware of several hearing notices, as the same were issued to the email [e-mail], ID whereas the email ID mentioned in Form-35 for communication of notices was [e-mail]. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of reduction of WIP amounting to Rs.2,48,11,928/- as to income of assessee. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject. Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming addition of entire credit entries in the bank amounting to Rs. 13,15,000/- as unexplained income u/s 69A of the Act 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming order u/s 144 of the Act without considering that the same is passed without considering submission of assessee 7. It is prayed that order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) may please be quashed.” 3. The assessee, through various grounds, i.e. Ground Nos. 1-4, has challenged the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) and also the additions made by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the Act, i.e. additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of reduction in WIP amounting to Rs. 2.48 crore and unexplained bank credits u/s. 69A of the Act amounting to Rs. 13.15 lakh. 4. During the course of hearing, the assessee submitted that the notices from NFAC were sent to an incorrect email ID i.e. [e-mail] instead of the one mentioned in Form-35 i.e. [e-mail]. Due to this mismatch, the assessee remained unaware of the appellate proceedings. An affidavit and portal screenshots were filed in support. Considering the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A), and in the interest of justice, we are of the view that the assessee deserves Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1386/Ahd/2025 Karnavati Developers Pvt Ltd Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– one more opportunity to present its case. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the appeal afresh, after providing due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the proceedings without fail. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The order The order The order The order is is is is pronounced i pronounced i pronounced i pronounced in n n n the the the the open open open open Court Court Court Court on on on on 22 22 22 22. . . .0 0 0 09 9 9 9.202 .202 .202 .2025 5 5 5. . . . Sd/ Sd/ Sd/ Sd/- - - - Sd Sd Sd Sd/ / / /- - - - ( ( ( (S S S SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL IDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL IDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL IDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ) ) ) (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 22.09.2025 **btk आदेश की \u0007ितिलिप अ ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to Copy of the Order forwarded to Copy of the Order forwarded to 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)- 5. िवभागीय \bितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ / / / BY ORDER, True Copy सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , अहमदाबाद / / / / ITAT, Ahmedabad ITAT, Ahmedabad ITAT, Ahmedabad ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation ….words processed by Hon’ble VP on his PC on 19.09.2025 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member …...19.09.2025 3. Other Member …..19.09.2025 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S …19.09.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is ed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement …..22..09.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S ..22.09.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk …......22.09.2025 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 "