SURESH NENMALJI MALVI,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT V. ITO - WARD 3(3)(5) AHMEDABAD, VEJALPUR, AHMEDABAD

ITA 36/AHD/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Suresh Nenmalji Malvi, the appellant, who contested the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) at the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The CIT(A) had dismissed Malvi's appeal due to a 20-day delay in filing, without considering the merits of the case. The primary contention was the dismissal of the appeal on procedural grounds rather than substantive issues concerning an addition of Rs. 99,70,000 to the assessee's income, which was alleged to be part of a fraudulent activity involving the sale of shares of SMS Techsoft India Ltd. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument regarding the minimal delay and lack of familiarity with tax procedures, leading to the decision to condone the delay and remand the case for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839532 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIJIT
• Assessee Lawyers: CHETAN AGARWAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 36/Ahd/2026 (िनधाŊरण वषŊ / Assessment Year : 2012-13) Suresh Nenmalji Malvi 37, Jivraj Park Society, Padmanabh Road, Patan, Gujarat- 384265 बनाम / Vs. ITO Ward-3(3)(5), Ahmedabad ̾थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AKMPM4951C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथŎ ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Chetan Agarwal, AR ŮȑथŎ की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement 23/02/2026 O R D E R PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as “NFAC”), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”) dated 25.11.2025 passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) and relates to Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee read as under: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact by not admitting an appeal of the assesse. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.36/Ahd/2026 [Suresh Nenmalji Malvi vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 – 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact by dismissing an appeal solely on the basis of delay of 20 days in filing appeal before Ld. Authority. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact by not adjudicating case on the merits and dismissing appeal on the basis of invalid and vague reasons without application of mind. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact by rejecting condonation request for only 20 days of delay in filing an appeal before Ld. Authority. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as on fact by upholding an addition made by Ld. AO amounting to Rs. 99,70,000/- u/s 69A being gross sales consideration on sale of shares of SMS Techsoft India Ltd., which is part of fraudulent activity preyed upon appellant and other 36 persons.” 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee stated that the assessee’s appeal was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) as non- maintainable by not condoning the delay of a mere 20 days in filing of the appeal before him. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded that the delay was very small and the assessee was a non- filer of return of income, whose case was reopened u/s.148 of the Act. He contended that the assessee was not well versed with the Income Tax matter, being non-filer of return of income and the delay being of a mere 20 days, the same be condoned and the matter to be restored back to the Ld. CIT(A) to be decided on merits. 4. At this juncture, it was noted that even the assessment order was passed ex parte and the assessee had not participated in the same. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee pleaded the same reason as above for non-participation in the assessment proceedings. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.36/Ahd/2026 [Suresh Nenmalji Malvi vs. ITO] A.Y. 2012-13 - 3 – 5. Noting above facts and circumstances, we consider it fit to condone the delay before the Ld.CIT(A), set aside the order passed by him and restore the matter back to the file of the AO for adjudication afresh subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs.5000/- for the laxity in its approach in dealing with matters relating to law. The cost is to be deposited by the assessee to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund and proof of the same to be submitted to the AO. The AO is directed to proceed with the matter only after the assessee submits proof of deposit of cost to the Prime Ministers Relief Fund. 6. In the result, the appeal of the asessee is, accordingly, allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced on 23/02/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 23/02/2026 S. K. SINHA 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 on 10.02.2026 2.Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 10.02.2026 3.Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S. 4.Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement 5.Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S 23.02.2026 6.Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk 23.02.2026 7.Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk…………. 8.The date on which the file goes to the Asstt. Registrar for signature on the order…………………… 9.Date of Dispatch of the Order………Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member 19.12.2019Other Member…………………Date on which the app Printed from counselvise.com "