MITASHI EDUTAINMENT PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(4), MUMBAI., MUMBAI
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
Per Bench.:
These four appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the different impugned orders 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 2014-15 to 2017-18. 2. Since all the issues involved in these four appeals are common and identical, therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and consolidated order is being passed for 2
Mitashi Edutainment Pvt Ltd, Mumbai.
the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take ITA No.
631/Mum/2025, A.Y 2017-18 as lead case and facts narrated therein.
3. At the very outset, Ld. AR submitted that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued without requisite permission u/s 151 of the Act. In this regard relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Union of India
Vs. Rajeev Bansal [2024] 469 ITR 46 (SC) and Ashish
Agarwal, civil appeal
No.
3005/2022
dated
04.05.2022. It was further argued by Ld. AR that the noticed issued is without containing DIN and was not issued by faceless AO.
4. On the contrary Ld. DR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Dhanraj
6387/5688/996 of 2023 and 22260 of 2022 and requested for dismissal of assessee appeal.
5. After having heard the arguments for both the parties, we found that these grounds were not taken by the assessee before the revenue authorities. Although a general plea / ground has been taken by the assessee thereby challenging the reopening of the case, but no such specific plea or ground was even taken by the assessee therefore there was no occasion before the revenue authorities to adjudicate the same.
3
Mitashi Edutainment Pvt Ltd, Mumbai.
In our view, although legal plea / ground can be raised at any stage of the proceedings, therefore we allow the assessee to raise the same in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC. Ltd [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC). Since certain factual verifications from the assessment records are required to adjudicate legal grounds raised by the assessee before us. Therefore we restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate these grounds on merits and Ld. CIT(A) would be at liberty to call for the assessment record or any other information from the A.O for proper adjudication.
The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.
7. 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.
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA Nos. 628, 629 & 630/Mum/2025, 2014-15 to 2016-17
As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to ITA No. 631/Mum/2025 for the A.Y 2017-18 (except variance in figures) and the decision rendered in 4 Mitashi Edutainment Pvt Ltd, Mumbai.
above paragraph would apply mutatis mutandis for these appeals also. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the present appeals also stands allowed for statistical purposes.
10. In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 14/10/2025 (PRABHASH SHANKAR)
(ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
(SANDEEP GOSAIN)
(JUDICIAL MEMBER)
Mumbai:
Dated: 14/10/2025
KRK, Sr. PS.
Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1)The Appellant
(2) The Respondent
(3) The CIT
(4) The CIT (Appeals)
(5) The DR, I.T.A.T.By order
(Asstt.