SHI vs. HKTI TECHNOLOGY PVT LTD,MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2426/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 October 2023AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the impugned order was ex-parte and not decided on merits. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the case was remanded to the Commissioner for a fresh decision, with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made a disallowance of Rs. 1,14,65,185/- on account of unsecured loans. The assessee appealed this to the Commissioner, but failed to appear or file submissions, leading to an ex-parte dismissal.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the Commissioner due to the assessee's non-appearance should be set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI B R BASKARAN, AM & SHRI N. K. CHOUDHRY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Paresh Deshpande, Sr
Hearing: 26.10.2023Pronounced: 30.10.2023

Shivshakti Technology Pvt. Dy. Commissioner of Ltd. 16, Gandhi Bhavan, Income Tax, Circle- Gr. Floor, Chunam Lane, 5(3)(1), Vs. Lamington Road, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400007. Mumbai-400020 PAN No. AAFCS2773J Appellant) : Respondent) Assessee /Appellant by : None Department /Respondent/ : Shri Paresh Deshpande, Sr. by DR Date of Hearing : 26.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 30.10.2023 O R D E R

Per N. K. Choudhry, JM:

1.

The Assessee/Appellant herein has preferred this appeal against the order dated 14.06.2023 impugned herein passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai {in short ‘Ld. Commissioner)’} under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

2.

In the instant case, the assessment order dated 13.11.2017 was passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 143(3) of the Act whereby disallowance of Rs. 1,14,65,185/- on account of unsecured loans has been made.

3.

The Assessee being aggrieved challenged the said disallowance by filing first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner on 04.04.2018, which was taken into consideration by issuing various notices, however, the Assessee neither appeared before the Ld. Commissioner nor filed any written submission or adjournment letter, therefore, in the constrained circumstances, the Ld. Commissioner decided the appeal as ex-parte and dismissed the same against which the Assessee has preferred the instant appeal which is fixed for today for hearing. Though the Assessee by filling an un-signed application dated 25/10/2023 sought adjournment, however, we realize that impugned order is an ex-parte and not on merit and therefore, in the interest of justice and for the just decision of the case, it would be appropriate to remand the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee, thus ordered accordingly. The Assessee is also directed to appear, if necessitates and file the relevant document which would be needed by the Ld. Commissioner for proper adjudication of the case and in case of further default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.

Shivshakti Technology Pvt. Ltd. 4. In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →