PRAGNABEN UMESHBHAI YAGNIK,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

ITA 2529/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Pragnaben Umeshbhai Yagnik, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed the addition of Rs.1,00,01,000 on account of non-deposit of tax on Short Term Capital Gain (STCG) for the Assessment Year 2015-16. The primary contention was that the assessee, an elderly retired teacher, did not receive the notices for the assessment due to them being sent to her old address, leading to an ex-parte assessment order and a delayed appeal. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's request for a fresh opportunity to present her case, despite acknowledging some negligence on her part regarding the update of her address.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 841610 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 17-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAMESHWAR P. MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: TUSHAR HEMANI
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद \u0011ायपीठ “डी“,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD \u0016ी संजय गग\u001b, \u0011ाियक सद एवं अ पूणा\u001b गु\"ा, लेखा सद क े सम&। ] Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.2529/Ahd/2025 िनधा \u000fरण वष\u000f /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pragnaben Umeshbhai Yagnik 118, Saket Raw House B/h. Memnagar Gram Panchayat Memnagar S.O. Ahmedabad – 380 025 बनाम/ v/s. The ITO Ward-1(2)91) Ahmedabad – 380 015 \u0013थायी लेखा सं./PAN: AAHPY 1844 P (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate Revenue by : Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 28/06/2024 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. The assessee, in this appeal, is aggrieved by the action of the lower authorities in making/confirming the addition of Rs.1,00,01,000/- on account non-deposit of tax of Short Term Capital Gain (STCG) earned by the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2529/Ahd/2025 Pragnaben Umeshbhai Yagnik vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2015-16 2 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee invited our attention to the impugned assessment order to submit that the same is an ex-parte/best judgement assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) u/s.147 r.w.s.144 of the Act. He has further invited our attention to the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) to show that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee holding the same as barred by limitation. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further invited our attention to the submissions made before the Ld. CIT(A) and has further contended that the assessee is an old-aged lady and a retired teacher. She had moved to some other place along with her husband, but the notices were issued by the AO at the old address of the assessee, which did not come to the notice of the assessee resulting into passing of the ex-parte assessment order and also delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee has a fair case on merits as the assessee had transferred the house/property to her son without any consideration. The Ld. Counsel has submitted that assessee could not furnish the requisite details and evidences before the lower authorities as she was not aware of the proceedings before the AO. The Ld. Counsel has, therefore, submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present her case before the AO. 4. The Ld. DR, however, has vehemently relied upon the findings of the lower authorities and has submitted that the assessee had been negligent in pursuing her case before the lower authorities. That it was the duty of the assessee to inform the changed address to the AO, if she had changed the address. He has further submitted that even the contention that the house/property has been transferred by the assessee to her son without consideration was not correct as in the sale-deed, there is a mention of the sale consideration paid. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2529/Ahd/2025 Pragnaben Umeshbhai Yagnik vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2015-16 3 5. We have considered the rival submissions. The fact on the file is that, in this case, the assessee could not represent her case before the lower authorities. The Ld. AR has also explained the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Though there may be delay before the Ld. CIT(A) due to some negligence on the part of the assessee also, but for which, she may be burdened with reasonable costs. However, in our view, the interests of justice demand that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present her case before the AO. 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 AO for assessment afresh, however, subject to condition of deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund. The assessee will furnish the proof of such deposit before the AO. Subject to fulfilment of the aforesaid condition, the AO will pass the assessment order afresh, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and of furnishing the requisite explanations and evidences. The assessee will be vigilant about the assessment proceedings before the AO and it will not be a ground to the assessee that she had not come to the knowledge of the notices issued by the AO. 6. With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 25 /02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Annapurna Gupta ) Accountant Member ( Sanjay Garg) Judicial Member अहमदाबाद/Ahmedabad, िदनांक/Dated 25/02/2026 टी.सी.नायर, व.िन.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2529/Ahd/2025 Pragnaben Umeshbhai Yagnik vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2015-16 4 आदेश की \"ितिलिप अ#ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ$ / The Appellant 2. \"%थ$ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु& / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु& ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \"ितिनिध , अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर , अहमदाबाद/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. 6. गाड\u000f फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स%ािपत \"ित //True Copy// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation (dictation pad is attached with file) : 19.2.2026 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member. : 20.2.2026 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S : 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement. : 5. Date on which fair order placed before Other Member : 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S. : 26.2.26 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk. : 26.2.26 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 Despatch of the Order : Printed from counselvise.com "