KARSHAN MANSUKH SOLANKI,RAJKOT V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1),RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 446/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Karshan Mansukh Solanki, against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Centre, Delhi. The appeal arose from an assessment order passed under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee, a farmer and uneducated, claimed he was unaware of the faceless assessment proceedings and did not receive any notices from the assessing officer or the CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) found that the principles of natural justice were violated as the assessee was not given a sufficient opportunity to be heard.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775802 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं (िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ Appellant by Respondent by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.14 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 20 18. Karshan Mansukh Solanki Sarvoday Society Vill, Gondal Road, Behind Hargange Way Bridge Shapar Veraval Rajkot Rajkot-360024, Gujarat ᭭थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोटɊायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 446/RJT/2025 िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ/Assessment Year: (2017-18) : Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld. AR : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. : 01/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025 ORDER . Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.144 of the Income Tax Act, after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 20 Sarvoday Society Vill, Gondal Road, Behind Hargange Way Bridge Shapar Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1) Aaykar Bhavan, Income Tax Officer, Race Ring Road, Rajkot, Rajkot-360001, Gujarat PAN/GIR No.: ESWPS7797Q (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) 1 राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , Ld. Sr. DR The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”]11.12.2023 of the Income Tax Act, after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2017- The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Aaykar Bhavan, Income Tax ing Road, Rajkot, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 446/Rjt/2025 Karshan Mansukh Solanki 2. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. assessee is a farmer and uneducated, therefore, he did not have knowledge of the faceless assessment proceedings, besides, no notices were issued by the assessing officer, therefore assessee was unaware about the proceedings before the assessing officer. On appeal, before the Ld. CIT(A) again the notices were assessee, therefore, the assessee could not reply during the appellate proceedings. The ld. Counsel for the assess opportunity to contest the appeal before the assessee. 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue neither appeared before the assessing officer nor appeared before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, if the bench wants to remitted officer, then in that circumstances 4. I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and n order, therefore, I do not wish to make raised by the assessee. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a farmer and uneducated, therefore, he did not have knowledge of the faceless assessment proceedings, besides, no notices were issued by the assessing see was unaware about the proceedings before the assessing officer. On appeal, before the Ld. CIT(A) again the notices were not assessee, therefore, the assessee could not reply during the appellate proceedings. The ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, another appeal before the assessing officer may be granted to the he ld. DR for the Revenue submitted that the assessee he assessing officer nor appeared before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, if the bench wants to remitted the case back to the file of the assessing circumstances the cost should be imposed on the assessee. heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld ials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 144 of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and n do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds 2 assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a farmer and uneducated, therefore, he did not have knowledge of the faceless assessment proceedings, besides, no notices were issued by the assessing see was unaware about the proceedings before the assessing not served on the assessee, therefore, the assessee could not reply during the appellate proceedings. ee contended that in the interest of justice, another may be granted to the that the assessee had he assessing officer nor appeared before the Ld. CIT(A), back to the file of the assessing the assessee. heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld note that in the assessee’s case of the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non-speaking any comments on the merits of the grounds Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 446/Rjt/2025 Karshan Mansukh Solanki 5. Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case succe CIT(A). I note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of natural justice. I note that it is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. However, on account of non assessee, I imposed a cost of Rs. 1,000/ in the Prime Minister National Relief Fund. deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, to the file of assessing officer after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. the view that the order of th issue needs to be looked into afresh by the observations as set out above. will afford opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in further evidence to substantiate case. For statistical purpose, the appeal of the 7.In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 11/09/2025 Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. . CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of t is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair ted party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard However, on account of non-compliance attitude cost of Rs. 1,000/- on the assessee which should be deposited in the Prime Minister National Relief Fund. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back ficer for de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. For the reasons given above, the view that the order of the CIT(A) on this issue requires to be set aside and the issue needs to be looked into afresh by the assessing officer in the light of the observations as set out above. I hold and direct accordingly. The assessing officer will afford opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in further evidence to substantiate case. For statistical purpose, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 11 /09/2025. Sd/- (DR. A.L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT M 3 Considering the above facts, we note that assessee has not given sufficient ssfully before the ld. . CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on merits based on the material available before him hence it is a violation of principle of t is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair ted party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard compliance attitude of the on the assessee which should be deposited without delving much restore the matter back adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is For the reasons given above, I am of e CIT(A) on this issue requires to be set aside and the in the light of the assessing officer will afford opportunity of being heard to the Assessee before deciding the issue. The Assessee will also be at liberty to let in further evidence to substantiate its is treated as allowed. result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. SAINI) CCOUNTANT MEMBER Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 446/Rjt/2025 Karshan Mansukh Solanki Copy of the order forwarded to :  The assessee  The Respondent  CIT  The CIT(A)  DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  Guard File /True copy/ By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot 4 Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS Printed from counselvise.com "