BASF INDIA LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 14(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2001/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 October 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issues afresh, providing one more opportunity to the assessee to represent their case. The assessee was also allowed to raise additional grounds.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeals were filed challenging an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) which dismissed their appeal, stating the grounds did not arise from the assessment order. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without considering an order giving effect to an Advance Pricing Agreement and a modified return of income.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering relevant documents and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity to present their case with additional grounds.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 92CD

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “K” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Tiwari
For Respondent: Ms. Neena Jeph, CIT (DR)
Hearing: 21.08.2025Pronounced: 10.11.2025

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:

These two appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 07.01.2025 respectfully 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 2023-14. Since all the issues involved in these two appeals are 2. common and identical and belongs to one assessee therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and consolidated order is being passed. Firstly we shall take BASF India Ltd. Mumbai. ITA No. 2001/Mum/2025, A.Y 2013-14 as lead case and facts narrated therein.

ITA No. 2001/Mum/2025, A.Y 2013-14

3.

At the very outset we noticed that Ld.

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →