VISION INFRACON (INDIA) PVT LTD,RAJKOT V. ITO, WARD-1(2)(5), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

ITA 458/RJT/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Vision Infracon (India) Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting a penalty imposed following an assessment order under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2011-12. The appellant argued that they were unable to represent their case adequately before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), leading to an ex-parte order that violated the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal noted that the quantum appeal related to the same assessment year was still pending before the CIT(A) and decided to remit the penalty appeal back to the CIT(A) for re-evaluation in light of the forthcoming decision on the quantum appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 775805 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-09-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 07-07-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ABHIMANYU SINGH YADAV; LD
• Assessee Lawyers: MEHUL RANPURA; LD
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

" आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ Vision Infracon (India) Pvt. Ltd. 130, Golden Plaza, Opp. J P Tower, Tagore Road, 360001 PAN :AACCV6558K (अपीलाथᱮ/assessee) िनधाᭅᳯरतीकᳱओरसे/Assessee by राज᭭वकᳱओरसे/Revenue by सुनवाईकᳱतारीख/Date of Hearing घोषणाकᳱतारीख/Date of Pronouncement Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A The present appeal has been filed by the Assessee, against the order passed by the Learned Commi Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 06.06.2025 arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here Assessment Year 2011-12. 2.At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण,राजकोटɊायपीठ,राजकोट। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “SMC” RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT BEFORE DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं/.ITA No.458/RJT/2025 िनधाᭅरणवषᭅ /Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vision Infracon (India) Pvt. Ltd. 130, Golden Plaza, Opp. J P Tower, Vs. ITO, Ward – 1(2)(5), Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Road, Rajkot – 360001 : (ᮧ᭜यथᱮ/Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Mehul Ranpura,Ld.AR Revenue by : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Date of Hearing : 01/09/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 11/09/2025 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), Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the 2.At the outset itself, the ld. Counsel for the assessee assailed the impugn order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. 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 ssioner of Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal, Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] arising in the matter of assessment order passed u/s.147 of the after referred to as “the Act”) relevant to the assailed the impugned order by contending that the assessee could not represent his case before Ld. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 458/RJT/2025 (AY 2011-12) Vision Infracon Pvt. Ltd. CIT(A) and the order being an ex violation of principle of natural justice. submitted that quantum appeal of the assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this penalty appeal of the assessee may be remitte the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, as per the Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, this penalty appeal may also be resorted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per outcome of quantum appeal of the assessee 3. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue debarred from objecting the stand of the ld. Counsel. 4. 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 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. note that since the quantum appeal of the assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, I remit this penalty appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to adjudicate this pena quantum appeal of the assessee. the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, file of Ld. CIT(A)for de novo CIT(A) and the order being an ex-parte order, stood vitiated on account of violation of principle of natural justice. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that quantum appeal of the assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). herefore, this penalty appeal of the assessee may be remitted back to the file of for fresh adjudication, as per the outcome of the quantum appeal Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, this penalty appeal may also be resorted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per outcome of quantum appeal of the assessee he ld. DR for the Revenue debarred from objecting the 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 materials brought on record. Considering the above facts, note that since the quantum appeal of the assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, I remit this penalty appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with the direction to adjudicate this penalty appeal as per the outcome of the quantum appeal of the assessee. Therefore, without delving much deeper into the merits of the case, in the interest of justice, I restore the matter back to the de novo adjudication and pass a speaking order after 2 parte order, stood vitiated on account of Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that quantum appeal of the assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A). d back to the file of quantum appeal Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) for the assessee contended that in the interest of justice, this penalty appeal may also be resorted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per outcome of quantum appeal of the assessee. he ld. DR for the Revenue debarred from objecting the 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 Considering the above facts, I note that since the quantum appeal of the assessee is pending before the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, I remit this penalty appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with lty appeal as per the outcome of the without delving much deeper into restore the matter back to the adjudication and pass a speaking order after Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 458/RJT/2025 (AY 2011-12) Vision Infracon Pvt. Ltd. affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is also directed to contest his stand forthwith. Therefore, set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and re Ld. CIT(A)to adjudicate the penalty appeal as per the outcome of the quantum appeal. For statistical purposes, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed 5. 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: 11/09/2025 Copy of the order forwarded to :  The assessee  The Respondent  CIT  The CIT(A)  DR, ITAT, RAJKOT  Guard File /True copy/ 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 the to adjudicate the penalty appeal as per the outcome of the quantum appeal. 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 11/09/2025. Sd/- (DR.A.L. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT M (True Copy) By order Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS ITAT, Rajkot 3 affording sufficient opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who in turn, is deem it fit and proper to mit the matter back to the file of the to adjudicate the penalty appeal as per the outcome of the quantum appeal. 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. SAINI) CCOUNTANT MEMBER Assistant Registrar/Sr. PS/PS Printed from counselvise.com "