MANVINDER SINGH NANDA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6744/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 December 2025AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI ARUN KHODPIA (Accountant Member)5 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the impugned order was passed ex parte. In the interest of justice, the assessee was granted one effective opportunity of being heard before the first appellate authority.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex parte order of the CIT(A) which arose from an assessment under Section 143(3). The assessee's representative fell ill and passed away during the appellate proceedings, leading to the assessee being unaware of the proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) without affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee should be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’

For Appellant: Ms. Namrata Chande
For Respondent: Shri Ajit Kumar, Sr. DR
Hearing: 23/12/2025Pronounced: 29/12/2025

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 30 August 2025 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)–50, Mumbai, arising out of the assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

2.

The assessee is aggrieved by the addition of ₹2,18,776/- made on account of unexplained money. At the outset, it was submitted that the assessee is a senior citizen and that during the pendency of appellate proceedings before the Manvinder Singh Nanda learned CIT(A), the authorised representative of the assessee was seriously ill and subsequently passed away. It was stated that due to these circumstances, the assessee remained unaware of the proceedings before the learned CIT(A), which ultimately resulted in an ex parte order.

3.

After considering the submissions and the material on record, we find that the impugned order has been passed ex parte. Having regard to the facts placed before us and in the interest of justice, we are of the considered view that the assessee deserves one effective opportunity of being heard before the first appellate authority.

4.

Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to his file for adjudication afresh in accordance with law, after affording due and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is directed to cooperate in the proceedings and to place all relevant material on record.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 29th December, 2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →