SHANTABEN JOITARAM PATEL,AHMEDABAD V. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2) (OLD WARD-5(3)(3)), AHMEDABAD

ITA 1029/AHD/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Shantaben Joitaram Patel against the reassessment order passed under section 147 read with section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The reassessment was initiated due to the non-filing of the income tax return by the assessee, who had made an investment in immovable property worth Rs. 42,00,000 during the financial year 2011-12. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) added Rs. 14,00,000 as undisclosed investment after the assessee could only substantiate Rs. 28,00,000 of the investment. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld this addition, leading to the current appeal. The tribunal, after considering the submissions and the circumstances, decided to set aside the lower authorities' orders and remand the case for a fresh assessment on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839032 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 08-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reassessment proceedings; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member And Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member Shantaben Joitaram Patel 11 Suryaansh Vedura Bunglow, Chandkheda, Ahmedabad-382424 Gujarat, India PAN: AEAPP8769F (Appellant) Vs The ITO, Ward-5(3)(2), Ahmedabad (Old Ward-5(3)(3), Ahmedabad (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri M S Chhajed, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr.D.R. Date of hearing : 18-02-2026 Date of pronouncement : 20-02-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER: T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal is filed by the Assessee as against appellate order dated 11-03-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the exparte reassessment order passed under section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2012-13. ITA No: 1029/Ahd/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1029/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2012-13 Shantaben Joitaram Patel Vs. ITO 2 2. Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a retired Teacher aged about 76 years old. The assessee is a widow and her sons and daughter migrated to Canada in 2004 and was staying in India alone till 2012. Since assessee being a retired person and no taxable income not filed the Return of Income for the Asst. Year 2012-13. During the Financial Year 2011-12, the assessee sold out her old house and purchased a new house for a consideration of Rs.42,00,000/- Since the assessee has not filed the Return of Income and made investment in immovable property of Rs.42,00,000/-, the assessment was reopened by issuing a notice u/s. 148 of the Act. 2.1. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee produced documents to the extent of Rs. 28,00,000/- for the purchase of immovable property, therefore the A.O. made addition on the balance amount Rs.14,00,000/- as undisclosed investment. 3. Aggrieved against the reassessment order, the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A) wherein additional documents were filed Ld. CIT(A) called for Remand Report from the A.O. and confirmed the addition made by the assessing officer. 4. Aggrieved against the appellate order, assessee is in appeal before us raising the following Grounds of Appeal: 1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is against the law, equity and principle of natural justice. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the addition made of Rs.14,00,000/- by Ld. A.O. 3. The appellant craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal. Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1029/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2012-13 Shantaben Joitaram Patel Vs. ITO 3 5. Ld. Counsel submitted referring to Dena Bank account of the assessee wherein sale consideration of Rs.5,00,000/- Rs. 4,00,000/- received by the assessee on 28-01-2011 and 22-02- 2011 on sale of old house and claimed that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to explain the details before the Ld. A.O. Similarly the source of assessee’s son, Axis Bank account is required to be explained before the assessing officer and relied upon the Bank Statements as well as the unregistered Sale Deed. 6. Considering the submission of the assessee and non-filing of the return, we hereby impose a cost of Rs.5,000/- payable by the assessee to the Income Tax Department within two weeks of receipt of copy of this order and produce the cost payment challan to the JAO. Thus the orders passed by the Lower Authorities are hereby set-aside with the direction to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to pass order on merits after considering the documents and details to be filed by the assessee. Needless to say the assessee should make use of this final opportunity of hearing and cooperate with the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for passing order on merits of the case. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 20-02-2026 Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER True Copy JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 20/02/2026 आदेश कȧ ĤǓतͧलͪप अĒेͪषत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- Printed from counselvise.com I.T.A No. 1029/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2012-13 Shantaben Joitaram Patel Vs. ITO 4 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, अहमदाबाद Printed from counselvise.com "