MIKAL BHUPENDRABHAI PATEL,PETLAD V. I.T.O WARD 1(3)(1), PETLAD, PETLAD

MA 1/AHD/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel, a non-resident Indian residing in the USA, who faced procedural hurdles in appealing against an income tax assessment for the years 2011-12 and 2012-13. His initial appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal due to a significant delay in filing and absence of necessary affidavits, compounded by his inability to appear in person due to residing abroad. After submitting a detailed affidavit explaining his circumstances and the reasons for the delay, the Tribunal found his explanations reasonable and bona fide, leading to the recall of the dismissal order.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 841260 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 01-01-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMESHWAR P MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: CHIRAG SHAH
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. BRR KUMAR, VICE PRESIDENT& SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. Nos.1&2/Ahd/2026 in I.T.A. Nos.473&474/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel, Zanda Chowk At Dharmaj, Petlad, Anand, Gujarat-388450 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(1), Petlad [PAN No.AQSPP9470H] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Chirag Shah, AR Respondent by: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 16.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 O R D E R PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER: The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, Shri Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel, had filed an appeal before this Tribunal in ITA No.473/Ahd/2025 for Assessment Year 2011-12. The said appeal came to be dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 17.10.2025 on the ground that the delay of 304 days in filing the appeal was not supported by an affidavit seeking condonation of delay and also due to non-appearance of the assessee on the date of hearing. As a result, the appeal was dismissed without adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee has thereafter filed the present Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 seeking recall of the order dated 17.10.2025. In the Miscellaneous Application, the assessee Printed from counselvise.com M.A Nos. 1&2/Ahd/2026 (in ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025) Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst. Years –2011-12 & 2012-13 - 2– has explained that he is a non-resident and has been residing in the United States of America for several years. It has been stated that due to his overseas residence, he could not travel to India in time for executing the affidavit required for condonation of delay and was also unable to remain present before the Tribunal on the date of hearing. It was further submitted that although he had planned to visit India in April 2025 to complete the necessary formalities, the said travel could not materialise due to unavoidable personal reasons. 3. It has been further submitted that the affidavit explaining the reasons for delay and non-appearance has now been duly executed abroad and is available on record along with the present application. According to the assessee, the appeal was dismissed for technical and procedural reasons and not on merits, and the relevant circumstances could not be placed before the Tribunal earlier due to reasons beyond his control. The assessee has expressed readiness to cooperate fully and to pursue the appeal diligently if an opportunity is granted. 4. We have considered the submissions made in the Miscellaneous Application and perused the material placed on record. It is evident that the appeal was dismissed at the threshold on account of non-filing of the affidavit for condonation of delay and non-appearance, without examination of the issues involved on merits. The assessee has now placed on record the affidavit explaining the reasons for delay as well as the circumstances which prevented him from appearing earlier. The explanation offered, particularly in view of the assessee being a non-resident, appears to be reasonable and bona fide. Printed from counselvise.com M.A Nos. 1&2/Ahd/2026 (in ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025) Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst. Years –2011-12 & 2012-13 - 3– 5. In the interest of justice and to ensure that the matter is decided on merits rather than being rejected on technical grounds, we are of the considered view that the assessee deserves an opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, we allow the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee in the interest of justice. The order dated 17.10.2025 passed in ITA No.473/Ahd/2025 for Assessment Year 2011-12 is hereby recalled. The Registry is directed to fix the appeal for hearing in due course after issuing due notice to both the parties. 6. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 24/02/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 24/02/2026 Tanmay, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की Ůितिलिप अŤेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथŎ / The Appellant 2. ŮȑथŎ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुƅ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयुƅ(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय Ůितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाडŊ फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "