INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(2), KALYAN, KALYAN WEST vs. NARESH HIMMATLAL SHAH, DOMBIVALI EAST

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5272/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 November 2025AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the Ld. Commissioner's order to be cryptic and lacking in reasoning. It was decided to set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The Revenue preferred an appeal against an order passed by the Ld. Commissioner which allowed the assessee's appeal. The assessee had appealed against an assessment order creating an addition of Rs. 10,90,487/-. The Assessee did not appear for the hearing.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. Commissioner's order allowing the appeal was sustainable without proper reasoning, and whether the case should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY

For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Joshi, Ld. Sr. D.R
Hearing: 11.11.2025Pronounced: 11.11.2025

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 14.06.2025, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Addl. CIT (A) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2011-12.

Mr. Naresh Himmatlal Shah 2. In the instant appeal, despite of sending notice for date of hearing today, the Assessee neither appeared nor filed any adjournment application. It is further observed that on 16.10.2025 as well, the Assessee neither appeared nor filed any adjournment. Thus, considering the aforesaid peculiar facts and circumstance, this court deem it appropriate to proceed with the case on the basis of orders passed by the authorities below and while hearing Ld. Add. CIT DR and perusing the material available on record.

3.

Coming to the merits of the case, it is observed from the impugned order that the assessee being aggrieved against the assessment order dated 18.02.2015 u/s 143(3) read with 147 of act whereby the addition of 10,90,487/- has been made, has preferred 1st appeal and therefore the Ld. Commissioner adjudicated the appeal of the Assessee and vide impugned order allowed the same, simply by writing 7 words only, which read as under:

"Allowed on the basis of written submission."

Admittedly the Ld. Commissioner has passed the impugned order in a cryptic manner, without mentioning the facts and circumstances of the case, determination made by the AO, the issue involved and reasons for allowing appeal of Assessee and therefore the impugned order is not appreciable by this Court, however for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the file of Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, suffice to say with reasons and while affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. Thus, it is ordered accordingly.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11.11.2025.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →