Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the Ld. Commissioner. The Assessing Officer had made additions on account of disallowances of salary, incentive, staff welfare, and business promotion expenses. Despite being given opportunities, the assessee failed to make compliance or file submissions before the Ld. CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal held that due to the peculiar facts and circumstances, and the issue remaining to be adjudicated properly, it was appropriate to remand the case to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision. The assessee was directed to file submissions and documents, and the remand was subject to a cost.
Key Issues
Whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication due to non-compliance by the assessee during appellate proceedings.
Sections Cited
250, 147, 144B
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH MUMBAI
(Assessment Year :2020-21) Captus Infotech Private Vs. DCIT, Circle 15(1)(2), Limited Mumbai, B-101, Saivihar CHS Ayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Plot No.434/435, Karve Road, New Marine Sector-1, Ghansoli Lines, Churchgate, Navi-Mumbai Mumbai.- 400020.i, Thane-400 701 PAN/GIR No.AAHCC8800C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Soumya Poojari, Ld. AR Revenue by Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 11/12/2025 Date of 11/12/2025 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R
PER Narender Kumar Choudhry, JM
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 18/08/2025 impugned herein passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) / National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) (in short ‘Ld. Commissioner’)
Application for adjournment filed by the Assessee is withdrawn.
In this case, the Assessing Officer (AO) vide assessment order dated 06.01.2025 u/s. 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act has made the additions of Rs. 1,98,97,618/- and Rs. 72,11,112/- respectively on account of disallowances of salary, incentive and staff welfare and business promotion expenses.
Though the assessee challenged the said additions by filing first appeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, despite affording 4 opportunities, neither made any compliance nor filed any submissions or documents. Therefore, in the constrained circumstances, the ld. Commissioner decided the appeal filed by the assessee as ex-parte and allowed partial relief to the amount of Rs. 11,06,890/- and affirmed the rest of the disallowances.
The ld. Counsel Ms. Soumya Poojari with regard to non-compliance during the appellate proceedings has submitted that main Director namely Shri. Irfan Khan Rofh Mohammed, was entangled in matrimonial litigations, which are still going on and which resulted into non- Capatus Infotech Private Limited compliance before the ld. Commissioner. The Ld. Counsel further stated that even otherwise, the data from the computers could not be retrieved and therefore the assessee failed to file relevant details but somehow by making sincere efforts, the assessee has now retrieved some of the data and if opportunity be given, then the Assessee shall substantiate its claim.
On the contrary, the ld. DR refuted the claim of the assessee by submitting that considering the conduct of the Assessee before the Authorities below, the assessee do not deserve any leniency but still if this Hon’ble Court deem it appropriate to remand the instant case, then the same should be subjected to heavy cost.
Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstances in totality and specific to the effect that issue involved, also remains to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner due to non-filing of submissions and documents, which the Assessee now undertakes to file, thus we for just and proper decision of the case and substantiate justice, deem it appropriate to remand the case to the file of ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to deposit of Rs. 11,000/- in the Revenue Department under ‘other heads’ within 30 days of the date of this order.
Capatus Infotech Private Limited 8. We also deem it appropriate to direct the Assessee to file the relevant submissions and documents before the ld. Commissioner. We clarify that in case of subsequent default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency.
Thus, the case is accordingly remanded to the file of Ld. Commissioner, in the above terms.