SHRI DIPAKKUMAR PARSOTAMDAS ASANANI,VILLAGE JETPUR, DIST. RAJKOT V. THE ITO WARD 1 (2) (1), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 435/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Dipakkumar Parsotamdas Asanani against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which was related to an assessment order under sections 147 and 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the Assessment Year 2013-14. The primary issue was the delay in filing the appeal, which was initially barred by limitation but later condoned by the Tribunal. The substantive issue in the appeal concerned the capital gains tax on the sale of a plot in Jetpur, which the assessee had accepted by adopting the jantri value as the sale price. The Tribunal noted procedural lapses in the appellate proceedings before the CIT(A), leading to an ex parte and non-speaking order, thus violating the principles of natural justice.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775841 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV; LD
• Assessee Lawyers: BRIJESH PAREKH; LD
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

" आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं Ǔनधा[रणवष[ Dipakkumar Parsotamdas Asanani Prop. Jay Jalaram Enterprise, M. G. Road, Rajkot – 360370 PAN : AECPA2955G (अपीलाथȸ/assessee) Ǔनधा[ǐरतीकȧओरसे/Assessee by राजèवकȧओरसे/Revenue by सुनवाईकȧतारȣख/Date of Hearing घोषणाकȧतारȣख/Date of Pronouncement Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, AM The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Ahmedabad/ National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 17.12.202 u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 20 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation of assessee has submitted petition for condo to condone the delay. The content reproduced below; आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोटɊायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं/.ITA No. 435/RJT/2025 Ǔनधा[रणवष[ /Assessment Year: 2013-14 Asanani , M. G. Vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot - 360001 : (Ĥ×यथȸ/Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Brijesh Parekh,Ld.AR Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Date of Hearing : 03/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 12/09/2025 ORDER Arjun Lal Saini, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Ahmedabad/ National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as .2024 arising in the matter of assessment order passed of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the Assessment Year 2013-14. The appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation of 117 days. The assessee has submitted petition for condonation of delay requesting the Bench the delay. The contents of the petition for condonation of delay are राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring d. Sr. DR The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Ahmedabad/ National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as arising in the matter of assessment order passed after referred to as “the 117 days. The nation of delay requesting the Bench of the petition for condonation of delay are Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 435/RJT/2025 Dipakkumar P. Asanani “In connection with the above appeal the applicant most humbly and respectfully begs to state and submit as under: 1] The case of the applicant was reopened. The applicant filed the return in response thereto. The applicant also replied to the show cause notice by the applicant and the reply filed in response to the show cause notice have not been considered by the Ld.A.Ο., NFAC, Delhi. 2] The addition made in the assessment order is the capital gain on the sale of the plot at Jetpur. The assessment was reopened for this reason only and the applicant had in the return filed in response to notice u/s.148 offered the capital gain on the sale of plot to tax adopting its jantri value/value as per Stamp Duty Valuation as the sale price and therefore this issue is not in dispute as the applicant has accepted the same. 3] It is submitted that the e Jitendra Kapadia and he did not National Faceless Appeal Centre and subsequent thereto the appeal order from the CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi dismissing the appeal within the time before the Honourable ITAT. The date of CIT[A] order is 17/12/2024. However, the fact that the appeal has been dismissed by the Ld.CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi came to the knowledge of the applicant in the last week of May to know the applicant has filed the appeal before the Honourable Bench. The affidavit in this regard is enclosed. Under the above circumstances it is prayed that the delay in filing the appal before the Honourable ITAT, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot may kindly be condoned for which act of kindness the applicant shall ever be grateful 3. Learned Counsel for the assessee condonation of delay, the assessee has explain the reasons for delay and sufficient cause for delay, therefore, the interest of justice. 4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the revenue sub failed to explain the sufficient cause, therefore, delay should not be condoned based on the filmsy reasons, and appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 5. I have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue and noted that ass has provided the email-id of his accountant/advocate. The notices of hearing were delivered on the email accountant/advocate did not inform the assessee onnection with the above appeal the applicant most humbly and respectfully begs to state and submit as under: 1] The case of the applicant was reopened. The applicant filed the return in response thereto. The applicant also replied to the show cause notice. However, the return filed by the applicant and the reply filed in response to the show cause notice have not been considered by the Ld.A.Ο., NFAC, Delhi. 2] The addition made in the assessment order is the capital gain on the sale of the The assessment was reopened for this reason only and the applicant had in the return filed in response to notice u/s.148 offered the capital gain on the sale of plot to tax adopting its jantri value/value as per Stamp Duty Valuation as the herefore this issue is not in dispute as the applicant has accepted the 3] It is submitted that the e-mail ID on the portal of the Department was of Sri Jitendra Kapadia and he did not inform the applicant about the notices from the Appeal Centre and subsequent thereto the appeal order from the CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi dismissing the appeal and as such the appeal could not be filed within the time before the Honourable ITAT. The date of CIT[A] order is 17/12/2024. he appeal has been dismissed by the Ld.CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi came to the knowledge of the applicant in the last week of May-2025 and on coming to know the applicant has filed the appeal before the Honourable Bench. The affidavit in this regard is enclosed. Under the above circumstances it is prayed that the delay in filing the appal before the Honourable ITAT, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot may kindly be condoned for which act of kindness the applicant shall ever be grateful” Counsel for the assessee, argued that in the above petition for condonation of delay, the assessee has explain the reasons for delay and sufficient cause for delay, therefore, the delay should be condoned in the 4. On the other hand, the Ld. DR for the revenue submitted that assessee has the sufficient cause, therefore, delay should not be condoned s, and appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 5. I have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue and noted that ass id of his accountant/advocate. The notices of hearing on the email-id of his accountant/advocate. accountant/advocate did not inform the assessee about notices of hearing 2 onnection with the above appeal the applicant most humbly and respectfully 1] The case of the applicant was reopened. The applicant filed the return in response . However, the return filed by the applicant and the reply filed in response to the show cause notice have not 2] The addition made in the assessment order is the capital gain on the sale of the The assessment was reopened for this reason only and the applicant had in the return filed in response to notice u/s.148 offered the capital gain on the sale of plot to tax adopting its jantri value/value as per Stamp Duty Valuation as the herefore this issue is not in dispute as the applicant has accepted the mail ID on the portal of the Department was of Sri the applicant about the notices from the Appeal Centre and subsequent thereto the appeal order from the and as such the appeal could not be filed within the time before the Honourable ITAT. The date of CIT[A] order is 17/12/2024. he appeal has been dismissed by the Ld.CIT[A], NFAC, Delhi 2025 and on coming to know the applicant has filed the appeal before the Honourable Bench. The affidavit Under the above circumstances it is prayed that the delay in filing the appal before the Honourable ITAT, Rajkot Bench, Rajkot may kindly be condoned for which act of ed that in the above petition for condonation of delay, the assessee has explain the reasons for delay and delay should be condoned in the mitted that assessee has the sufficient cause, therefore, delay should not be condoned s, and appeal of the assessee may be dismissed. 5. I have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue and noted that assessee id of his accountant/advocate. The notices of hearing accountant/advocate. The about notices of hearing. The Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 435/RJT/2025 Dipakkumar P. Asanani assessee came to know when Thereafter, the assessee took immediate steps to file the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, I note that assessee, the assessee should not be penalised and hen justice, I condoned the delay. 6. On merit, Ld. Counsel for the assessee documents and details before the assessing officer. However, before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee could not submitted required details the appellate proceedings as the accountant corporate, therefore the assessee evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) and order. The Ld. Counsel submitted that now the assessee has ready to submit the required documents and Counsel prayed that one more opportunity his case before the Ld.CIT(A), and matter Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 7. The ld. DR for the Revenue restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh 8. 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 laws relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s Act and the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and non-speaking order, therefore, merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. assessee came to know when demand notice was issued by the assessing officer Thereafter, the assessee took immediate steps to file the appeal before the Therefore, I note that because of mistake of the advocate of the assessee, the assessee should not be penalised and hence in the interest of justice, I condoned the delay. 6. On merit, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that assessee submitted entire and details before the assessing officer. However, before the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee could not submitted required details and documents, the appellate proceedings as the accountant/advocate of the assessee did not the assessee could not submitted details and documentary evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) and hence the Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex order. The Ld. Counsel submitted that now the assessee has ready to submit the required documents and details before the Ld. CIT(A),therefore, Counsel prayed that one more opportunity may be given to the assessee to plead (A), and matter may be restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. . The ld. DR for the Revenue did not raise any objection if the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf of the assessee along with the documents furnished and laws 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 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. 3 the assessing officer. Thereafter, the assessee took immediate steps to file the appeal before the mistake of the advocate of the ce in the interest of that assessee submitted entire and details before the assessing officer. However, before the Ld. and documents, during of the assessee did not details and documentary the Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order. The Ld. Counsel submitted that now the assessee has ready to submit all therefore, Ld. given to the assessee to plead restored back to the file of the any objection if the matter is 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 relied upon, and perused the fact of the case including the findings of the note that in the assessee’s r.w.s. 144 the the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A), is an ex parte order and do not wish to make any comments on the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 435/RJT/2025 Dipakkumar P. Asanani 9. 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 hen principle of natural justice. justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to contest his case. deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, back to the file of Ld. CIT(A after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and re the Ld. CIT(A)to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 10.In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on राजकोट/Rajkot िदनांक/ Date : 12/09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to :  The assessee  The Respondent  CIT  The CIT(A)  DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  Guard File /True copy/ Considering the above facts, I note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the 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. Therefore, without de deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter A)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 of to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. .In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 12/09/2025 Sd/- (DR. A.L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (True Copy) By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot 4 note that assessee has not given sufficient opportunity of being heard and could not plead his case successfully before the note that the ld. CIT(A) did not discuss the assessee’s case on ce it is a violation of t is settled law that principles of natural justice and fair play require that the affected party is granted sufficient without delving much restore the matter adjudication and pass a speaking order after affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, deem it fit and proper mit the matter back to the file of to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, .In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. EMBER Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS Rajkot Printed from counselvise.com "