RANMALBHAI PALABHAI CHHUCHHAR,JAMNAGAR, GUJARAT V. ASSESSING OFFICER, JAMNAGAR, GUJARAT

ITA 502/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves two interconnected appeals by the same assessee, Ranmalbhai Palabhai Chhuchhar, against the orders passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. These appeals arose from the assessment order passed under sections 147, 144, and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2014-15. The primary contention was the violation of the principles of natural justice, as the assessee's advocate failed to appear during the assessment proceedings, leading to an ex-parte order. The Tribunal noted that the assessee was ready to submit all necessary documents and details for a fair reassessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775437 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 09-08-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144; 271(1)(c)

Judgement Text

" 4 ITA No. 502 & 503/Rjt/2025 Ranmalbhai Palabhai Chhuchhar u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for as quantum appeal to the file of the assessing officer, therefore, penalty imposed by the assessing officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act However, the AO initiate penalty proceeding if any, in accordance with law. 8. In the result, both the appeal purposes Order is pronounced in the open court on राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date: 10/09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The assessee 2. The Respondent 3. CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, RAJKOT 6. Guard File u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act for assessment year 2014-15. Since, I have remitted file of the assessing officer, therefore, penalty imposed by the assessing officer u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act does not have any leg to stand. However, the AO initiate penalty proceedings in de-novo assessment proceedings, if any, in accordance with law. the appeals of the same assessee are allowed for statistical Order is pronounced in the open court on 10/09/2025. Sd/- (DR. A. L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot 15. Since, I have remitted the file of the assessing officer, therefore, penalty imposed by does not have any leg to stand. novo assessment proceedings, allowed for statistical SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 502 & 503/Rjt/2025 Ranmalbhai Palabhai Chhuchhar relied upon, and perused the CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s the Act and the impugned order passed by t non-speaking order, therefore, of the grounds raised by the assessee. 6. Considering the above facts, opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. CIT(A). I 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. I 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. However, on account of non assessee, I imposed a cost of Rs. deposited in the Prime Minister National Relief Fund. much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, matter back to the file of Ld. AO order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) of the Ld. AO to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee (ITA No. 502/Rjt/2025) 7. Since, I have remitted a quantum appeal of the assessee in the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication for assessment year 2014 The assessee also filed an appeal before ITA 503/Rjt/2025 against penalty levied relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. I note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 the Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and speaking order, therefore, I do not wish to make any comments on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient ing heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. 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 t is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard However, on account of non-compliance attitude of the cost of Rs. 10,000/- on the assessee which should be deposited in the Prime Minister National Relief Fund. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, Ld. AO 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, I deem it fit and proper to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the matter back to the file to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the (ITA No. 502/Rjt/2025) is treated as allowed. quantum appeal of the assessee in (ITA 502/Rjt/2025 of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication for assessment year 2014 The assessee also filed an appeal before ITA 503/Rjt/2025 against penalty levied fact of the case including the findings of the ld note that in the assessee’s case 144 and 144B of he ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and do not wish to make any comments on the merits note that assessee has not given sufficient ing heard and could not plead his case successfully before the ld. 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 t is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard compliance attitude of the on the assessee which should be without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in deem it fit and and remit the matter back to the file to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the ITA 502/Rjt/2025) to of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication for assessment year 2014-15. The assessee also filed an appeal before ITA 503/Rjt/2025 against penalty levied Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 502 & 503/Rjt/2025 Ranmalbhai Palabhai Chhuchhar 2. Since, both these appeals are interconnected, and pertain to same assessee; therefore both these appeals has been consolidated order is being passed 3. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The the assessment proceedings the assessee hired advocate who did not appear during the assessment proceedings, therefore, because of the mistake of the advocate of the assessee, the assessee could not furnish the during the assessment proceedings. On CIT(A), the notices were not served on the assessee, therefore, the assessee could not file required documents and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) and as the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex merit. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further submitted ready to submit entire documents and details before the assessing officer, therefore, matter may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue neither appeared before the assessing officer not before the Ld. CIT(A), on account of non-compliance attitude of the assessee cost of Rs. 10,000/ imposed on the assessee whic Fund. 5. I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws Since, both these appeals are interconnected, and pertain to same assessee; therefore both these appeals has been clubbed and heard together and is being passed for convenience and brevity. At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the assessment proceedings the assessee hired advocate who did not appear during he assessment proceedings, therefore, because of the mistake of the advocate of he assessee could not furnish the relevant documents and evidence during the assessment proceedings. On appeal filed by the assessee before the Ld. notices were not served on the assessee, therefore, the assessee could not file required documents and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) and as the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without adjudicating the various issue on for the assessee further submitted that now the assessee ready to submit entire documents and details before the assessing officer, therefore, matter may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh he ld. DR for the Revenue submitted that the assessee neither appeared before the assessing officer not before the Ld. CIT(A), compliance attitude of the assessee cost of Rs. 10,000/ imposed on the assessee which can be deposited in Prime Minister National Relief have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws Since, both these appeals are interconnected, and pertain to same assessee; clubbed and heard together and a assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that during the assessment proceedings the assessee hired advocate who did not appear during he assessment proceedings, therefore, because of the mistake of the advocate of relevant documents and evidence by the assessee before the Ld. notices were not served on the assessee, therefore, the assessee could not file required documents and evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) and as a result parte order without adjudicating the various issue on now the assessee is ready to submit entire documents and details before the assessing officer, therefore, matter may be remitted back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh submitted that the assessee had neither appeared before the assessing officer not before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore compliance attitude of the assessee cost of Rs. 10,000/- must be Prime Minister National Relief have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and the case laws Printed from counselvise.com आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं (िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ Appellant by Respondent by Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A The present two appeal order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre, Delhi orders dated 12.06.2024 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s. r.w.s. 144 and 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here Act”) relevant to the same A Ranmalbhai Palabhai Chhuchhar Survesh Gohil & Associates Office, No.202, 2nd Floor, Opp. Saint Ann’s School, Jamnagar – 361008 ᭭थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ (अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant) आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोटɊायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 502 & 503/RJT/2025 िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ/Assessment Year: (2014-15) : Ms. Madhvi Khetiya, Ld. AR : Shri Dheeraj Kumar Gupta, Ld. : 09/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 10/09/2025 ORDER . Arjun Lal Saini, A.M.: appeals have been filed by the same Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A),NFAC arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s. of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Assessment Year 2014-15. Ranmalbhai Palabhai Chhuchhar Survesh Gohil & Associates Office, Floor, Opp. Saint Ann’s 361008 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Wd Aayakar Bhavan, Income Tax Office, Lal Wadi Main Road, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Jamnagar Rajkot High Way – Jamnagar 361008 ./PAN/GIR No.: AHCPC8148G (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER , Ld. Sr. DR Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National ),NFAC”] both arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.147 after referred to as “the Income Tax Officer, Wd – 1(5), Aayakar Bhavan, Income Tax Wadi Main Road, Nr. Subhash Bridge, Jamnagar Rajkot Jamnagar 361008 Printed from counselvise.com "