MUDRAA HOLDING PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 2 (2) (3) , MUMBAI

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

reasons stated in the affidavit of the director of assessee company, stated in the affidavit of the director of assessee company, stated in the affidavit of the director of assessee company, relevant extract of which is reprodu relevant extract of which is reproduced as under : a) That my accountant had received the order u/s 250 of the Act on the a) That my accountant had received the order u/s 250 of the Act on the a) That my accountant had received the order u/s 250 of the Act on the Income tax portal on 29/05/2023. Income tax portal on 29/05/2023. b) That my office staff went to file the appeal to the registrar on b) That my office staff went to file the appeal to the registrar on b) That my office staff went to file the appeal to the registrar on 28/07/2023 but he was asked to file the same online on e 28/07/2023 but he was asked to file the same online on e-filing port filing portal. c) Since 29/07/2023 & 30/07/2023 being Saturday and Sunday c) Since 29/07/2023 & 30/07/2023 being Saturday and Sunday c) Since 29/07/2023 & 30/07/2023 being Saturday and Sunday respectively, the offices were closed and hence the appeal could not be respectively, the offices were closed and hence the appeal could not be respectively, the offices were closed and hence the appeal could not be filed on these days. On 31/07/2023 being the next working day, the filed on these days. On 31/07/2023 being the next working day, the filed on these days. On 31/07/2023 being the next working day, the accountant tried to file the appeal online but was fin accountant tried to file the appeal online but was finding difficulty in ding difficulty in doing the same. Therefore he again went to the registrar and requested doing the same. Therefore he again went to the registrar and requested doing the same. Therefore he again went to the registrar and requested him to kindly admit the appeal offline and the same was filed. him to kindly admit the appeal offline and the same was filed. him to kindly admit the appeal offline and the same was filed. d) That the delay in filing the present appeal was due to reason beyond d) That the delay in filing the present appeal was due to reason beyond d) That the delay in filing the present appeal was due to reason beyond my control and I had no my control and I had no malafide intention to jeopardize the interest of malafide intention to jeopardize the interest of the revenue. 2.1 The Ld. Counsel The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that delay in filing the delay in filing the appeal might be condoned in view of bona fide reasons. The Ld. appeal might be condoned in view of bona fide reasons. The Ld. appeal might be condoned in view of bona fide reasons. The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) also did not seriously object for Departmental Representative (DR) also did not seriously object Departmental Representative (DR) also did not seriously object admission of the appeal. admission of the appeal.

Mudraa Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 3 & 2688/Mum/2023 ITA Nos.

2. On the facts & in the 2. On the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble CIT (A) erred in passing an ex parte order wi Hon'ble CIT (A) erred in passing an ex parte order wi Hon'ble CIT (A) erred in passing an ex parte order without considering number of submission filed before the then jurisdictional considering number of submission filed before the then jurisdictional considering number of submission filed before the then jurisdictional CIT (A) & passing the order without providing CIT (A) & passing the order without providing sufficient opportunity sufficient opportunity to explain the facts of the case and the to explain the facts of the case and the reasons assigned for doing so reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provisions are wrong and contrary to the provisions of Income Tax and rules of Income Tax and rules made thereunder. made thereunder. 3. On the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts & in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT (A) erred in not considering the submission made before Hon'ble CIT (A) erred in not considering the submission made before Hon'ble CIT (A) erred in not considering the submission made before the appellate authorities during pre authorities during pre-faceless period the copy of which faceless period the copy of which was available with them and the lable with them and the reasons assigned for doing so are reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the provisions of Income Tax and rules made wrong and contrary to the provisions of Income Tax and rules made wrong and contrary to the provisions of Income Tax and rules made thereunder. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding Rs. 1,73,50,000/ - made by the Ld made by the Ld AO to the returned income u/s. 68 of the IT Act 1961 by treating AO to the returned income u/s. 68 of the IT Act 1961 by treating AO to the returned income u/s. 68 of the IT Act 1961 by treating genuine loan as ingenuine and the reasons assigned for doing so are genuine loan as ingenuine and the reasons assigned for doing so are genuine loan as ingenuine and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the Provisions of Income Tax Act and rules wrong and contrary to the Provisions of Income Tax Act and rules wrong and contrary to the Provisions of Income Tax Act and rules made there under. made there under. 5. On the facts and in On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding an addition of Rs.72,02, 187/ Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding an addition of Rs.72,02, 187/ Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding an addition of Rs.72,02, 187/- to the returned income u/s. 69C of the IT Act 1961 on account of the returned income u/s. 69C of the IT Act 1961 on account of the returned income u/s. 69C of the IT Act 1961 on account of unexplained expenses and the reasons assigned for doing so are unexplained expenses and the reasons assigned for doing so are unexplained expenses and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contra wrong and contrary to the Provisions of Income Tax Act and rules ry to the Provisions of Income Tax Act and rules made there under. made there under. 5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding an addition of Rs. 14,36,232/ Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding an addition of Rs. 14,36,232/ Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding an addition of Rs. 14,36,232/- to the returned income on account of commission the returned income on account of commission expense by alleging by alleging the failure to produce correspondence and establish the nexus the failure to produce correspondence and establish the nexus the failure to produce correspondence and establish the nexus between the export's orders received and the commission paid and between the export's orders received and the commission paid and between the export's orders received and the commission paid and the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the the reasons assigned for doing so are wrong and contrary to the Provisions of Income Tax Act and rules made Provisions of Income Tax Act and rules made there under. 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding the penalty initiated by Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in upholding the penalty initiated by the Ld. AO the Ld. AO u/s. 271(1)(C) of the IT u/s. 271(1)(C) of the IT Act 1961 and the reason assigned for doing Act 1961 and the reason assigned for doing

Mudraa Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 4 & 2688/Mum/2023 ITA Nos. so are wrong and contrary to the provision o so are wrong and contrary to the provision of Income Tax Act and f Income Tax Act and rules made there under. rules made there under.”

5.1 Before us, the Ld. Counsel Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that all the assessee submitted that all the submissions were filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) in the the submissions were filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) in the the submissions were filed before the Commissioner (Appeals) in the physical hearing, however after transfer of the appeal to the however after transfer of the appeal to the however after transfer of the appeal to the faceless, the assessee co assessee could not respond to the notices as he was uld not respond to the notices as he was under impression that all the submissions had ion that all the submissions had already filed before already filed before the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) under provision of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) under provision of the Ld. CIT(A). We find that the Ld. CIT(A) under provision of section 250(6) of the Act is required to pass order on merit of the section 250(6) of the Act is required to pass order on merit of the section 250(6) of the Act is required to pass order on merit of the grounds raised even no representat en no representation on the part of the assessee, ion on the part of the assessee, but he has not decided the appeal on merit and merely dismissed in but he has not decided the appeal on merit and merely dismissed in but he has not decided the appeal on merit and merely dismissed in default on the part of assessee in not complying the notices. default on the part of assessee in not complying the notices. default on the part of assessee in not complying the notices. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case we feel it Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case we feel it Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case we feel it appropriate to restore these appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for te to restore these appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for te to restore these appeals to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding afresh and pass a reasoned order on merit and pass a reasoned order on merit after taking into after taking into consideration submission of the assessee. The ground No. 1 and 2 consideration submission of the assessee. The ground No. 1 and 2 consideration submission of the assessee. The ground No. 1 and 2 of the appeal of the assessee for both the assessment years are of the appeal of the assessee for both the assessment years of the appeal of the assessee for both the assessment years allowed whereas the remaining grounds are not required to be allowed whereas the remaining grounds are not required to be allowed whereas the remaining grounds are not required to be adjudicated upon.

Mudraa Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 5 & 2688/Mum/2023 ITA Nos.