DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. PARSOLI CORPORATION LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7466/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 January 2023AY 2007-082 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order lacked proper reasoning and required fresh examination. Therefore, all issues were set aside to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not appear before the Tribunal despite multiple adjournments. The CIT(A) passed an order without providing proper reasoning for his decisions.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the lack of reasoned order by the CIT(A), necessitating a fresh examination of all grounds raised by both parties.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI ‘C’ BENCH, MUMBAI.

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM)

For Respondent: Shri K.C. Selvamani
Hearing: 03.01.2023Pronounced: 03.01.2023

Heard together (3 matters)

I.T.A. No. 7466/Mum/2017
C.O. No. 34/Mum/2019
I.T.A. No. 243/Mum/2018

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

The cross appeals filed by the parties and the cross objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 4.10.2017 passed by the learned CIT(A)-9, Mumbai and they relate to A.Y. 2007-08.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee even though adjournment was granted on several occasions at the specific request of the assessee. We noticed that the last opportunity was given to the assessee on 8.12.2022, still assessee did not turn up before the Tribunal. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeals ex-parte, without presence of the assessee.

2 M/s. Parsoli Corporation Ltd.

3.

We have heard learned DR and perused the record. We noticed that the learned CIT(A), after recording the submissions of the assessee, has passed the order without giving proper reasoning in support of his decision. Accordingly, we are of the view that all the issues require fresh examination at the end of the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside all the issues to his file for examining them afresh and for passing a reasoned order. Accordingly all the issues urged by the assessee in its appeal and cross objection and all the issues urged by the Revenue in its appeal are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard, the learned CIT(A) may take appropriate decision in accordance with law.

4.

In the result, the appeal and cross objection filed by the assessee as well as appeal filed by the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →