INDIA BULLION AND JEWELLERS ASSOCIATION LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-CC-4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 6670/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 December 2025AY 2018-19Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry (Judicial Member), Shri Bijayananda Pruseth (Accountant Member)2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

Considering the peculiar facts, the Tribunal remanded the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision. The assessee is to be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard and directed to file all relevant submissions and documents, with a warning that no leniency will be shown for future defaults.

What were the facts?

The assessment proceedings for A.Y. 2018-19 were conducted during the Covid-2019 period, leading to an assessment order with additions. The assessee appealed to the Ld. Commissioner (CIT(A)) but failed to comply with notices, resulting in an ex-parte order being passed without proper consideration of submissions and documents.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the Ld. Commissioner without affording a proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee was valid and in the right perspective.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “C” Bench, Mumbai.

For Appellant: Ms. Khushali Desai, Ld. AR

For Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, Ld. DR

Hearing: 11/12/2025

(Assessment Year : 2018-19) India Bullion and Jewellers Association Ltd. DCIT, CC-4(1)(1) Building 185, Kalbadevi Aayakar Bhavan H.O. Mumbai-400 002. Vs. M.K. Road Mumbai-400 020. PAN : AAACT1449D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Khushali Desai, Ld. AR Revenue by : Shri R.A. Dhyani, Ld. DR Date of Hearing : 11/12/2025 Date of : 11/12/2025 pronouncement O R D E R Per Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) :-

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 14.8.2025 impugned herein passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Mumbai (in short Ld. Commissioner) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short „Act‟) for A.Y.2018-19.

Though the assessee filed an application for adjournment, however during the course of argument withdrawn the same.

In this case, the assessment proceedings were carried out during Covid- 2019 period when the entire nation was on hold and which resulted into passing the assessment order dated 21.11.2023, whereby certain additions were made and therefore though the assessee filed first appeal challenging the said assessment order before Ld. Commissioner, however despite issuance of notice, made no compliance, which resulted into passing the impugned order as ex-parte but not in the right perspective and proper manner of the issues involved, specifically in the absence of relevant submission/documents.

2 India Bullion and Jewellers Association Ltd.

Thus, considering the said peculiar facts and circumstances in totality, we deem it appropriate to remand instant case to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The assessee is also directed to file relevant submissions and documents in the appellate proceedings before Ld. Commissioner. We clarify 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 for decision afresh in the aforesaid terms.

In the result, assessee‟s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 11/12/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →