RAMESHBHAI JASHUBHAI PATEL,GHATLODIA, AHMEDABAD V. ITO WARD 4(2)(4), PRESENT ITO WARD 4(2)(3), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1291/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Rameshbhai Jashubhai Patel, the appellant, contesting an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which dismissed his appeal due to a significant delay in filing. The primary issue was the confirmation of a disallowance of Rs. 18,55,000, which was added as income under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, attributed to unexplained cash deposits in a bank account. The appellant argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to his physical handicap and lack of legal knowledge, which prevented him from seeking timely advice. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's difficulties and remanded the case for a thorough examination of the evidence and proper legal proceedings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 792462 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 04-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURESH CHAND MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: S V AGARWAL; DIVYA AGARWAL
• Keywords: Business income; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148; 68; 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1291/Ahd/2025 (Assessment Year: 2016-17) Rameshbhai Jashubhai Patel, A-7, Satkar Bunglow, K K Nagar Road, Ghatlodia, Ahmedabad-380061 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(4), Present ITO, Ward-4(2)(3), Ahmedabad [PAN No.AKSPP7877N] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri S V Agarwal & Shri Divya Agarwal, ARs Respondent by : Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 02.12.2025 Date of Pronouncement 02.12.2025 O R D E R The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), ADDL/JCIT(A)-11, Mumbai on 13.09.2024 for A.Y. 2016-17. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: “1. Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-11 Mumbai has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by not condoning the delay in filing of appeal and he further erred in not deciding the appeal on merits of the case. 2. Ld. Addl./Jcit (A)-11 Mumbai has erred in confirming disallowance of Rs. 18,55,000 made by Ld. A.O. for cash deposited in bank a/c u/s 68 of the Act. In as much as, the said cash is deposited out of business receipt of proprietary concern of assessee “Sankalp Corporation”.” 3. The return of income for A.Y. 2016-17 declaring total income at Rs. 2,33,090/- was filed by the assessee on 31.03.2017. As per the information received from investigation the Revenue initiated proceedings under Section 147 of the Act and notice under Section 148 dated 18.03.2019 was served upon the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1291/Ahd/2025 Rameshbhai Jashubhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year–2016-17 - 2 - assessee. No reply was filed by the assessee to the statutory notices and therefore, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 18,55,500/- as cash deposit with HDFC treating the same under Section 69 of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed on the ground that there is a delay of 621 days in filing the appeal. 5. At the time of hearing the Ld. AR submitted that the assessee is handicapped (60%) and was not able to know about the legal intricacies and was not aware where to approach and therefore, could not take any advisory from the right consultant. The Ld. AR submitted that before both the authorities the order passed is ex-parte, therefore, the matter may be remanded back as held in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2012-3, 2013-14 and 2015-16. 6. The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A). 7. Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record. It is pertinent to note that the assessee requires assistance in his day-to- day activities and is totally dependent due to his handicapped. The professional whom he has approached earlier does not follow the procedure properly and therefore, the assessment order as well as the order of the CIT(A) is ex-parte and in fact, the delay before the CIT(A) was also not deliberate but due to the failure on part of the consultant. Therefore, in the interest of justice, it will be appropriate to remand back this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for proper verification of the evidences which was filed before us and adjudicate the issues on merit as per Income Tax Act. The Ld. AR who before the Tribunal today given an undertaking that the follow up before the Statutory Authorities Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 1291/Ahd/2025 Rameshbhai Jashubhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Year–2016-17 - 3 - will be properly complied. Needless to say, the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 02/12/2025 Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 02/12/2025 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 1. Date of dictation 02.12.2025 2. Date on which the type draft is placed before the Dictating Member 02.12.2025 3. Other Member………………… 4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S .12.2025 5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement .12.2025 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 02.12.2025 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 02.12.2025 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…………………….. Date of Dispatch of the Order…………………………………… Printed from counselvise.com "