SHRI LAXMIKANT KAKUBHAI RUPAREL,ADIPUR KUTCHH V. THE ITO WARD 1, GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

ITA 581/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Laxmikant Kakubhai Ruparel against an ex-parte order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre, Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2017-18 under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The primary contention was that the assessee was unable to represent his case or submit necessary documents due to circumstances beyond his control, leading to a violation of natural justice. Both parties agreed that the matter should be restored back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 783635 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-11-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 22-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIJAY KUMAR SINGH; LD
• Assessee Lawyers: PRATIK A. KANABAR; LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, राजकोट Ûयायपीठ, राजकोट। 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. 581/RJT/2025 िनधाªरणवषª / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Laxmikant Kakubhai Ruparel Shaz No.1, Zanda Chowk, Adipur Gujarat - 370205 PAN No.: ADPPR9042M Vs. Income Tax Officer, wd – 1, Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Gandhidham (अपीलाथê/Assessee) : (ÿÂयथê/Respondent) िनधाªåरतीकìओरसे/Assessee by : Shri Pratik A. Kanabar, Ld. AR राजÖवकìओरसे/Revenue by : Shri Vijay Kumar Singh, Ld. CIT(DR) सुनवाईकìतारीख /Date of Hearing : 04/11/2025 घोषणाकìतारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 04/11/2025 ORDER 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), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 12.09.2025, arising in the matter of order passed by the assessing officer u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”), relevant to the Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At the outset itself, the Learned Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 581/RJT/2025 Laxmikant K. Ruparel Page 2 of 3 violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee could not file the documentary evidences before the Ld.CIT(A) due to circumstances beyond its control, however, the assessee sought to be ask for adjournment during the appellate proceedings but did not file the required details and documents for adjudication on merit, therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) passed ex-parte order. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, as the assessee now ready to file required details and documents before the Ld.CIT(A). 3. On the other hand, the Learned DR for the Revenue did not have any objection, if the matter is restored back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A). 4. We 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 ld CIT(A) and other materials brought on record. We note that in the assessee’s case under consideration, the assessment was carried out u/s 147 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. 5. 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). 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 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 581/RJT/2025 Laxmikant K. Ruparel Page 3 of 3 back to the file of Ld. CIT(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, 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 ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue afresh on merits. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order is pronounced in the open court on 04/11/2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Dinesh Mohan Sinha) Judicial Member Sd/- (Dr. Arjun Lal Saini) Accountant Member राजकोट/Rajkot //True Copy// िदनांक/ Date : 04/11/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to :  The assessee  The Respondent  CIT  The CIT(A)  DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  Guard File /True copy/ By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot Printed from counselvise.com "