MAHESHBHAI DHRUVE,JAMNAGAR V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(4), JAMNAGAR

ITA 368/RJT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Maheshbhai Dhruve against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was based on an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was the alleged delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A), which the CIT(A) dismissed as being late by 21 months. However, the assessee argued that there was no delay, as the appeal was filed within the stipulated time after receiving the assessment order. The Tribunal noted that the appeal was indeed filed on time and criticized the lower authorities for not providing a fair opportunity to the assessee to present his case, leading to an ex-parte decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34025 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2024
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN AGARWAL; LD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"ITA No. 368/Rjt/2024 A.Y. 2010-11 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH (SMC), RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.368/RJT/2024 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Hybrid Hearing) Maheshbhai Dhruve, Jamnagar Gadit Pado Nr. Old Lohana Mahajanwadi, Jamkhambhakiya, Jamnagar - 361305 Vs. The ITO Ward – 1(4), Jamnagar, Öथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AISPD9898F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. A.R. Respondent by Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 30/10/2024 Date of Pronouncement 29/11/2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER DR. A. L. SAINI, AM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2010-11, is directed against the separate order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which in turn arises, out of an assessment order, passed by Assessing Officer, under section 147 and read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 01.12.2017. ITA No. 368/Rjt/2024 A.Y. 2010-11 2 2. Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset submitted that there was no delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee, on the reason that assessee has filed the appeal late by 21 Months, however, there is no delay, as the order of the assessing officer was received by the assessee on 25th October 2019 and appeal was filed before the ld. CIT(A) on 23rd November 2019, hence, there is no delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 3. Alternatively, but without admitting, the learned Counsel stated that assessee, has furnished, the petition for condonation of delay also, in respect of the delay, if any, to be condoned, before the ld. CIT(A), explaining the sufficient cause, therefore, this tribunal, may condone the delay, if any, and since the appeal of the assessee was decided by the lower authorities, ex-parte, therefore, matter may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 4. Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset submitted that assessee was not aware about the online proceedings, therefore, the assessee did not send his responses to the ld CIT(A) about the hearing, during appellate proceedings. Therefore, the assessee could not submit required documents and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A), and as a result, the ld. CIT( A) passed the ex-parte order, without adjudicating the issue on merit. The Learned Counsel also submitted that certain documents and evidences are yet to be submitted before the assessing officer, therefore it would be better to remit this issue back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 5. On the other hand, Ld. DR for the revenue submitted that there was delay in filing the appeal before learned CIT(A), therefore, the assessee`s appeal may be dismissed. Without prejudice to the above, ld. DR further submitted that assessee neither appeared during the assessment proceedings, before the ITA No. 368/Rjt/2024 A.Y. 2010-11 3 assessing officer, nor appeared during the appellate proceedings, before the learned CIT(A), therefore, it would be waste of resources, if the matter is remitted back to the file of the lower authorities for fresh adjudication, hence appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 6. I have heard both the parties. I have examined the date of assessment order, and receipt date of the assessment order by the assessee, I have also gone through the petition for condonation of delay, filed by the assessee, before me. I find that the order of the assessing officer was received by the assessee, on 25th October 2019 and appeal was filed by the assessee, before the ld. CIT(A), on 23rd November 2019, hence, there is no delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 7. 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 non-speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. 8. Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. 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 principle 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. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the file of assessing officer, 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. Therefore, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the ITA No. 368/Rjt/2024 A.Y. 2010-11 4 matter back to the file of the assessing officer to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Sd/- (Dr. A.L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TRUE COPY Rajkot *Ranjan िदनांक/ Date:29/11/2024 Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot "