MEWARA SHIV RAJ,BHILWARA vs. ITO WARD 19(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“F” BENCH MUMBAI
BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER&
SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mewara Shiv Raj
Gulab
Baba ki
Dhuni,
Gulabpura,
District Bhilwara, Bhilwara,
Rajasthan – 311021. Vs.
ITO
Ward
19(1)(1),
Mumbai
Piramal Chamber,
Lal Baug, Parel,
Mumbai – 400012. PAN/GIR No. CDGPR4032L
(Applicant)
(Respondent)
Assessee by Shri Brijesh Shah
Revenue by Shri Vivek Perampurna (CIT-DR)
Date of Hearing
27.11.2025
Date of Pronouncement
03.12.2025
आदेश / ORDER
PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 22.07.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2022-2023. 3. From the records, we noticed that assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A) and in this regard Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was not provided with proper and sufficient opportunity of hearing by Ld. CIT(A). It was 2
Mewara Shiv Raj, Rajasthan.
further submitted that the impugned order is in breach of principles of natural justice and assessee had complied all the notices received by Ld. CIT(A). It was submitted that supporting documents were duly submitted before revenue authorities and assessee had pursued the appeal diligently but because of miscommunication between the Ld. AR and the assessee, the appeal filed by the assessee could not be effectively contested before the first appellate authority.
4. On the contrary the Ld. DR submitted that Ld. CIT(A) was right in dismissing the appeal as the assessee had not cooperated and had not furnished required documents to substantiate its claim. Therefore while following the principles of nature justice the appeal was rightly rejected.
Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and taking into consideration the facts narrated before us and while taking a lenient view, we found that there was reasonable cause because of which assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Hence the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter afresh by providing adequate opportunity to the 3 Mewara Shiv Raj, Rajasthan.
assessee. Since there was non-cooperation on behalf of the assessee during the proceedings before the revenue authorities therefore a nominal cost of Rs. 5,000/- is imposed upon the assessee for delaying the proceedings which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and a copy of the receipt shall be placed on file before
CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.
The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.
6. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.
7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 03.12.2025 (OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA) (SANDEEP GOSAIN)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated 03/12/2025
KRK, Sr. PS