PREMJIBHAI DANABHAI BHANKHODIYA,MORBI V. INCOEM TAX OFFICER, MORBI

ITA 776/RJT/2024

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Premjibhai Danabhai Bhankhodiya against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, which arose from an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary grievances included the dismissal of the appeal in violation of the principles of natural justice and the confirmation of an estimated addition under section 69A of the Act. The assessee contended that due to the remote location and lack of internet facilities, he was unaware of the faceless proceedings and did not receive any notices of hearing, leading to his inability to appear before the Assessing Officer or the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted the violation of natural justice as the assessee was not given sufficient opportunity to be heard and decided to restore the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 34009 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV; LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN AGARWAL; LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144; 250; 69A

Judgement Text

"ITA NO. 776/RJT/2024 A.Y 2011-12 Premjibhai D Bhsnkhodiya 1 | P a g e IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DINESH MOHAN SINHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.776/RJT/2024 Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Premjibhai Danabhai Bhankhodiya, “Sonprem”, Sanghavi Street, Near Jain Upashraya, Darbar Gadh, Morbi-363641. Vs. The ITO,Ward-4, Morbi. Öथायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AGXPB0025F (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld. A.R. Respondent by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06/01/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28/03/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per, Dr. A. L. Saini, AM Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to assessment year (AY) 2011-12, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[in short ‘Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC’], under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), vide order dated 16.08.2024, which in turn arises out of ITA NO. 776/RJT/2024 A.Y 2011-12 Premjibhai D Bhsnkhodiya 2 | P a g e an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, vide order dated 30.10.2018. 2. Grievances raised by the assessee, are as follows: The grounds of appeal mentioned herein under are without prejudice to each others 1.0 Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in law and facts in dismissing the appeal in violation of principles of natural justice; 1.1 Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in law and facts in dismissing the ground related to validity of re-assessment proceedings; 3.0 Ld. Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre has erred in law and facts in confirming the estimated addition u/s 69A of the Act of Rs. 15,18,000/-, which may kindly be deleted and justice be done; Your appellant craves leave to add, alter, withdraw any one or more grounds of appeal. 3. At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the assessment proceedings the assessee was not aware of the Faceless proceedings. The assessee resides in the remote areas in village, there is no internet facilities and therefore did not receive any notices of hearing also. Therefore, the assessee could not appear before the Assessing Officer. On appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the Ld.Counsel of the assessee did not help the assessee and because of the mistake of the Ld.Counsel of the assessee, the proceedings before the Ld.CIT(A) remains unattended. Therefore, Ld.Counsel contended that because of mistake of the Ld.Counsel of the assessee, the assessee should not be penalized and one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to pled his case before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. 4. On the other hand, the Ld.DR did not raised any objection if the matter is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. ITA NO. 776/RJT/2024 A.Y 2011-12 Premjibhai D Bhsnkhodiya 3 | P a g e 5. We have heard both the parties. We 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, we do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. 6. 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) and Assessing Officer. We 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. We 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, we 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, we deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the 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. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 28/03/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (DINESH MOHAN SINHA) (Dr. A.L. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) Rajkot (True Copy) िदनांक/ Date: 28/03/2025 ITA NO. 776/RJT/2024 A.Y 2011-12 Premjibhai D Bhsnkhodiya 4 | P a g e Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. The Assessee 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. Pr. CIT 5. DR/AR, ITAT, Rajkot 6. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot "