PLACEWELL JOB PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. WARD 7(3)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3255/MUM/2022Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 March 2023AY 2016-174 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that a fair opportunity of hearing is essential and the assessee did not receive the notices. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merit.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the NFAC for non-prosecution, and disallowances were enhanced. The assessee claimed notices were sent to a wrong email address and never received.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without proper service of notice, and whether the disallowances were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 36(1)(iii),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Hearing: 08.03.2023Pronounced: 08.03.2023

आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.

P a g e | Placewell Jobs Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3)(3)

More judgments on Section 36(1)(iii)

All 3,665 judgments and leading authorities on Section 36(1)(iii) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →