REGUS BUSINESS CENTRE (NAGPUR) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-(OSD)-3(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 29/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 March 2023AY 2011-20123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, in the interest of natural justice, granted the assessee a last opportunity to present its case and evidence before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer was directed to pass an order on merits after considering the assessee's submissions.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in providing serviced offices, filed its return declaring a loss. The Assessing Officer made various disallowances, and the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal for non-furnishing of evidence. The assessee sought a last opportunity to present its case.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted a last opportunity to present its case before the AO, and whether the AO should consider the evidence submitted by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, Smt. Mahita Nair
Pronounced: 31.03.2023

O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M:

This appeal has been filed by the assessee, challenging the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (‘ld.CIT(A) for short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘NFAC’ for short) u/s.250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act'), pertaining to the Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ for short) 2011-12.

2.

The assessee has challenged the various additions/disallowances made by the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) by way of an ex parte order. manage, control and deal in any manner with fully and partly furnished staffed and equipped or otherwise service offices or commercial accommodation including one or more offices, cyber cafes and offering ancillary business services. The assessee filed its return of income dated 25.11.2011, declaring current year losses of Rs.1,06,37,445/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment order dated 17.02.2014 was passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act where the Assessing Officer (A.O. for short) made various disallowances on advertisement, legal and professional expenses, management fees and determined the total loss of Rs.77,70,060/-. The assessee challenged the said order before the ld. CIT(A) who dismissed the said appeal on the ground that the assessee has failed to furnish any reply or documentary evidences in support of its claim.

4.

The assessee is in appeal before us.

5.

The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR for short) for the assessee prayed that the assessee may be provided with a last opportunity to present its case before the A.O. by furnishing documentary evidences in support of its claim.

6.

The learned Departmental Representative (ld. DR for short) for the Revenue had nothing to controvert the same.

7.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In the interest of principles of natural justice, we deem it fit and proper to provide the assessee with one last opportunity to present its case before the A.O. The assessee is directed to submit the relevant evidences in support of its claim without any undue delay. the assessee. Hence, this matter is remanded back to the file of the A.O.

8.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 31.03.2023

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →