NITESH ARVINDBHAI THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD V. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(2), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1630/AHD/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Nitesh Arvindbhai Thakkar against the order of the CIT(A), which treated an unsecured loan of Rs.38,00,000 as income from unexplained sources for the Assessment Year 2016-17. The appeal was initially decided ex parte, leading to a significant delay in filing the appeal with the Tribunal. The assessee's counsel argued that the delay was due to the migration of the case to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) without the assessee's knowledge, resulting in non-representation and non-receipt of notices. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's explanation for the delay and the non-representation, and thus decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 298704 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-04-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAVAN LIMBASIYA
• Assessee Lawyers: S.N. DIVETIA
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

"आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ अहमदाबाद \bयायपीठ ‘B’ अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE S/SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1630/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Nitesh Arvindbhai Thakkar Balaram Cotton Industries Mujpur Rod Bagodara Road At Dholka : 382 225 PAN : ADHPT 0858 M Vs The Dy.CIT, Cir.3(2) Ahmedabad. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee by : Shri S.N. Divetia, AR Revenue by : Shri Kavan Limbasiya, Sr.DR सुनवाई क तारीख/Date of Hearing : 02/04/2025 घोषणा क तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 02/04/2025 आदेश आदेश आदेश आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member The above appeal has been filed by the assessee against order passed by the Ld.Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “ld.CIT(A)] dated 27.04.2024 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\" for short) arising out of the order of passed by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as “AO”) under section 143(3) of the Act pertaining to Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The assessee, in this appeal is aggrieved by the action of the ld.CIT(A) in treating the unsecured loan of Rs.38,00,000/- as income of the assessee from unexplained sources. ITA No.1630/Ahd/2024 2 3. The Registry has also put a note that the appeal is barred by 444 days. The ld.counsel for the assessee, in this respect, has invited our attention to the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) to submit that the same is an ex parte order. The ld.cousnel for the assessee has further invited our attention to an application for condonation of delay, which is in the shape of an affidavit filed by the assessee wherein, it has been mentioned that the assessee had earlier filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad on 28.01.2019 manually. It has been further mentioned that the authorized representative of the assessee appeared before the ld.CIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad from time to time and produced necessary documents, however, thereafter, the appeal was migrated to National Faceless Appeal Centre (“NFAC”) . However, the assessee was not aware of the same, and the notice, if any, sent by the NAFC on email, etc. did not come to the notice of the assessee, and therefore, the case of the assessee remained unrepresented before the NAFC. The ld.counsel for the assessee has further stated the assessee has a fair case on merit, and that the assessee had duly produced relevant evidences to prove identity and credit-worthiness of the creditors and also genuineness of the transaction. He, therefore, has submitted that the delay in filing appeal may be condoned, and matter may be restored back to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for decision afresh on the appeal of the assessee, after giving due opportunity to the assessee to present his case. The ld.DR, however, has relied on the finding of the ld.CIT(A). 4. We have considered rival contentions. Admittedly, the case of the assessee has been decided by the ld.CIT(A) ex parte of the assessee. The assessee has duly explained the reasons for non- appearance before the ld.CIT(A) as well as for delay in filing the ITA No.1630/Ahd/2024 3 present appeal. The ld.counsel for the assessee contended that the assessee has a fair case on merit. 5. Considering overall facts of the case, in our view, interests of the justice will be well served, if the assessee is given an opportunity to present his case before the ld.CIT(A). In view of this, the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for decision afresh. Needless to say, the ld.CIT(A) will provide proper opportunity to the assessee to present the case, and thereafter decide the case on merits by way of a speaking order. The assessee is also directed to check email etc., if any, sent by the ld.CIT(A) regarding the date of hearing and will promptly participate in the proceedings before the ld.CIT(A) and furnish necessary details/arguments to prove his case. 6. With the above observation, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Sd/- Sd/- (Narendra Prasad Sinha) Accountant Member (Sanjay Garg) Judicial Member Ahmedabad,dated 02/04/2025 "