VIJAYKUMAR VAGHAJIBHAI PATEL,PETLAD V. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), PETLAD

ITA 2122/AHD/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vijaykumar Vaghajibhai Patel, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which confirmed an addition of Rs.32,79,000 as unexplained cash deposited in the appellant's bank account for the Assessment Year 2012-13. The appellant, represented by Shri B.T. Thakkar, argued that the assessment order and the notice of demand were issued without a Document Identification Number (DIN), rendering them invalid. Additionally, the appellant contested the addition of the cash credit under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and claimed that the CIT(A) passed the order without a personal hearing, violating principles of natural justice. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's request for a personal hearing and set aside the CIT(A)'s order, restoring the matter to the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 839992 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 11-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURESH CHAND MEENA
• Assessee Lawyers: B.T. THAKKAR
• Keywords: Set aside; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद \u0011ायपीठ एस.एम.सी,अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD \u0018ी संजय गग , \u0011ाियक सद एवं अ पूणा गु\"ा, लेखा सद क े सम&। ] Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Annapurna Gupta, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं /ITA No.2122/Ahd/2025 िनधा \u000fरण वष\u000f /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Vijaykumar Vaghajibhai Patel 89, Ashray Tenement Maa Krupa Near GEB Anand Petlad – 388 450 (Gujarat) बनाम/ v/s. The ITO Ward-1(3)(1) Petlad – 388 450 \u0013थायी लेखा सं./PAN: ANFPP 2671 N (अपीलाथ)/ Appellant) (*+ यथ)/ Respondent) Assessee by : Shri B.T. Thakkar, AR Revenue by : Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] dated 29/09/2025 passed u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. 2. In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by the action of the lower authorities in making/confirming the addition of Rs.32,79,000/- on account of unexplained cash deposited in the bank account of the assessee. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2122/Ahd/2025 Vijaykumar Vaghajibhai Patel vs. ITOK Asst. Year : 2012-13 2 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee. The grounds of appeal are reproduced hereunder: “1. Assessment order passed without DIN on fact of order, the assessment order is invalid and deemed to have never be issued as per CBDT instruction no.19/2019. It may be so decided now. 2. Notice of demand of Rs.24,10,109 issued without Din be declared as invalid. 3. Addition of Rs.32,79,000/- as cash credit u/s.69A being unjust and unlawful be directed to be deleted. 4. CIT(A) passed order without providing opportunity of personal hearing through VC in spite of specific requested made on portal on 11/11/2024, the order passed by CIT(A) be declared as void and against the principles of natural justice. 5. Your appellant prays to add, alter or amend grounds fo appeal at the time of hearing”. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has stated at bar that as per instruction of his client, he does not press Ground Nos.1 & 2, therefore the same are, accordingly, dismissed as not pressed. 5. So far as Ground Nos.3 & 4 are concerned, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee is an agriculturist and was not aware of the complexity of the income-tax proceedings. That the notices issued by the Assessing Officer (AO) did not come to his knowledge. That the AO has made the addition of the entire deposits of cash in the bank account of the assessee. He submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to explain the source of the deposits. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.2122/Ahd/2025 Vijaykumar Vaghajibhai Patel vs. ITOK Asst. Year : 2012-13 3 6. We find that both the orders of the lower authorities are ex-parte orders against the assessee. In our view, the interests of justice will be well-served if the assessee is given an opportunity to furnish the evidences and explain the source of deposits in his bank account. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is hereby set aside and matter is restored to the file of the AO for decision afresh. It is further directed that the AO will give proper opportunity to the assessee to furnish the requisite details and evidences, thereafter, the AO will pass the assessment order afresh in accordance with law. 7. With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 25 /02/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Annapurna Gupta ) Accountant Member ( Sanjay Garg) Judicial Member अहमदाबाद/Ahmedabad, िदनांक/Dated 25/02/2026 टी.सी.नायर, व.िन.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS आदेश की \"ितिलिप अ#ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ$ / The Appellant 2. \"%थ$ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु& / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु& ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय \"ितिनिध , अिधकरण अपीलीय आयकर , अहमदाबाद/DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. 6. गाड\u000f फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स%ािपत \"ित //True Copy// सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad Printed from counselvise.com "