LALJIRAM KEDAR VISHWAKARMA,THANE vs. ITO WARD 1(1) , THANE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4110/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 October 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal directed the Ld.CIT(A) to consider the condonation of delay and provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld.CIT(A) which dismissed the assessee's appeal due to delay in filing. The assessment order was passed by the AO, who brought to tax a sum of Rs. 38,04,129/- representing a loan given by the assessee. The assessee claimed to be unaware of the proceedings.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal due to delay without considering the assessee's claim of unawareness and without providing a reasonable opportunity for hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “J(SMC

Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV & MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL

O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 12-03-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor was any adjournment application filed. Considering that the matter has been adjourned on couple of occasions, it was decided that no useful purpose would be served in adjourning the matter any further and to decide the matter based on material available on record.

3.

On perusal of the material available on record, it is noted that the assessment order was passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟), wherein the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs. 38,04,129/- being the amount of loan given by the assessee to M/s. Mahendra Dished Ends Pvt. Ltd. as assessee failed to explain the nature and source of the loan amount and addition of Rs. 38,04,129/- was made u/s. 69A of the Act. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who has since dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay in filing the appeal in absence of any reasonable cause shown by the assessee.

4.

It is noted that the assessee is a 75 years old senior citizen and as part of his appeal memo before the Ld. CIT(A), has stated that he was not aware of the proceedings so initiated in his name by the AO and thereafter, when he received a communication from the office, he has taken requisite steps and file the appeal though belatedly. It is also a matter of record that no specific notice has been issued to the assessee before rejecting his appeal by the ld CIT(A). Considering the age of the assessee as well as lack of appropriate communication as to the proceedings so initiated against him as so claimed and in absence of an opportunity before the appeal was dismissed, we believe that the assessee deserves one more opportunity and the matter is accordingly set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the same afresh including the condonation of delay, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to comply with the notices and furnish necessary information/documentation as so called for/as so advised. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →