MRS. MASUMA EQBAL HUSAIN RUPANI,MUMBAI vs. THE ITO 19-(3)(3), MUMBAI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM ITA Nos. 648 to 651/Mum/2004 (Assessment Years: 1996-97 & 1997-98)
Mrs. Masuma Iqbal Hussain Rupani I.T.O – 19(3)(3) Zarine Lodge, 3rd Floor, Mumbai TPS-IV, Hill Road, Bandra (W), Vs. Mumbai-400 050
PAN/GIR No. AACPR 7624 K (Appellant) (Respondent) :
Assessee by : None Revenue by : Smt. Mahita Nair
Date of Hearing : 08.03.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 31.03.2023
O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:
These appeals have been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), passed u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Years (‘A.Y.’ for short) 1996-97 and 1997-98.
As the facts in all these appeals are identical, we hereby pass a consolidated order in these appeals.
There was no representation on behalf of the assessee, we hereby pass an ex parte order by hearing the learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR for short) for the Revenue and on perusal of the available materials on record.
2 ITA Nos. 648 to 651/Mum/2004 (A.Ys.1996-97 & 1997-98) Mrs. Masuma Iqbal Hussain Rupani vs. ITO 4. The brief facts are that the assessee is an individual and had filed her return of
income for the impugned years. It is observed that the assessee filed application under
Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme, 1997 (VDIS for short). The assessee failed to
pay taxes declared under VDIS scheme and subsequently, the assessee’s case was
reopened and the assessment order u/s. 143 r.w.s. 147A was passed and penalty was also
levied on the same. The assessee had challenged the said order before the ld. CIT(A) who
dismissed the said appeals without providing adequate opportunity of being heard.
The assessee was in appeal before the Tribunal.
Having heard the ld. DR and perused the materials on record. We deem it fit to
restore this matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the direction to decide the appeals on
merits, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Both the
quantum appeals as well as the appeals challenging the consequential penalty are set
aside to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication.
In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31.03.2023.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Prashant Maharishi) (Kavitha Rajagopal) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai; Dated : 31.03.2023 Roshani, Sr. PS
3 ITA Nos. 648 to 651/Mum/2004 (A.Ys.1996-97 & 1997-98) Mrs. Masuma Iqbal Hussain Rupani vs. ITO
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT - concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER,
(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai
