DYANESHWARI MULTI STATE URBAN CO OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIT APPEAL, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1594/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 September 2023AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeals to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, providing one more opportunity to the assessee. This was subject to the assessee paying a cost of Rs. 1 lakh to the Prime Minister's Relief Fund.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against CIT(A) orders for AY 2014-15 to 2018-19. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer, leading to ex-parte orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the tax authorities despite non-cooperation, and if so, under what conditions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “D” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM)

For Appellant: Shri Prasad Kulkarni
For Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal
Hearing: 14.09.2023Pronounced: 14.09.2023

Heard together (5 matters)

I.T.A. No. 1593/Mum/2023
I.T.A. No. 1594/Mum/2023
I.T.A. No. 1595/Mum/2023
I.T.A. No. 1596/Mum/2023
I.T.A. No. 1597/Mum/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Per Bench:-

1.

The assessee has filed these appeals challenging the orders passed by the learned CIT(A)-52, Mumbai and they relate to A.Y. 2014-15 to 2018-19.

2.

Learned counsel appearing for the assessee requested for adjournment of the appeals on the ground that the assessee has sought certain information from the Assessing Officer and they are yet to be supplied. However, on perusal of the orders passed by the learned CIT(A), we noticed that the assessee did not respond to various notices issued by the learned CIT(A) and hence he was constrained to pass the orders ex-parte, without hearing the assessee. Learned AR appearing before us could not give any convincing reason for not appearing before the learned CIT(A).

2 Dyaneshwari Multi State Urban Cooperative Credit Society Limited

3.

The Learned DR pointed out that the assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer also and hence the Assessing Officer has passed the orders to the best of his judgement under section 144 of the I.T. Act.

4.

Thus, we notice that both the tax authorities have passed the orders ex-parte, due to non-cooperation of the assessee with them. We notice that huge tax demand has been raised against the assessee in all the years. Since the assessee is a co-operative credit society, we are of the view that, under the principles of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its cases properly before ld CIT(A). However, the same shall be at a cost, since the assessee was delinquent in its approach and has not cooperated with the tax authorities. The imposition of cost will also enable the assessee to understand about the seriousness of the income tax proceedings. Accordingly, we impose a cost of Rs.1.00 lakh (Rupees One lakh) upon the assessee, which shall be paid to the credit of “Prime Minister Relief Fund” within two months from the date of receipt of this order.

5.

Subject to the payment of the above said cost as directed by us, which fact shall be verified by the learned CIT(A), all the grounds urged before us in all the five appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh. After providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the learned CIT(A) may take appropriate decision in accordance with the law in all the five years.

6.

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in on 14.9.2023.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →