M/S. SHREE HARI BUILDERS ,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 17(3)(1), MUMBAI
आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई|
IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH,
MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
&
SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सुं./ITA No.4457/MUM/2025
(धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-2014)
M/s.
Shree
Hari
Builders
139 2nd Floor, Seksaria
Chambers, N.M. Road,
Fort, Mumbai 400023
v/s.
बिाम
Income Tax Officer, Ward
17(3)(1), Mumbai
Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 to C-
43, G Block, Bandra Kurla
Complex,
Bandra
(East),
Mumbai 400051
स्थायी लेखा सुं./जीआइआर सुं./PAN/GIR No: AABFS2234F
Appellant/अपीलाथी
..
Respondent/प्रधिवादी
धििााररिी की ओर से /Assessee by:
Shri Rajiv Khandelwal, CA
(Virtually Appear)
राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by:
Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
स िवाई की िारीख / Date of Hearing
25.08.2025
घोर्णा की िारीख/Date of Pronouncement
19.09.2025
आदेश / O R D E R
PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :-
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the National
Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 14.05.2025 passed u/s.
250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year 2013-2014. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds in this appeal.
“1. a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not allowing sufficient and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Appellant before disposing off the appeal ex-parte.
P a g e | 2
ITA No 4457/Mum/2025 AY 2013-14
Shree Hari Builders b) In reaching to the conclusion and dismissing the appeal ex-parte, the Id. CIT(A) omitted to consider relevant factors, considerations, principles and evidences while he was overwhelmed, influenced and prejudiced by irrelevant considerations and factors.
a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action taken by the AO in re-opening the assessment u/s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 inspite of the fact the prescribed conditions are not satisfied.
b) The Id. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that initiation of re-opening of the assessment proceedings and completion of the assessment u/s.144 r.w.s. 147 is without juri iction and bad in law.
3) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the id. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the AO has erred in not allowing sufficient and reasonable opportunity of hearing to your Appellant and thereby further erred in completing the ex-parte assessment in haphazard manner without proper appreciation of facts, materials and evidences on record.
On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating on each and every of grounds of appeal raised by the Appellant on the merit of the case.
The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any or all of the above grounds of appeal.”
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed its return of income for AY 2013-14. As per the information available with the department an immovable property worth Rs. 2,16,81,500/- was sold during the year by the assessee. Accordingly, a notice u/s. 148 was issued on 23.03.2021. As no details with regard to this transaction were submitted by the assessee during the course of further proceedings, the assessment was completed ex-parte treating the amount of Rs. 2,16,81,500/- as short term capital gain of assessee vide order dated 29.03.2022 passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act. Aggrieved with this order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessee did not comply to various notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), he dismissed the appeal ex-parte vide order dated 14.05.2025. Aggrieved with this order the assessee has filed an appeal before the Tribunal.
P a g e | 3
ITA No 4457/Mum/2025 AY 2013-14
Shree Hari Builders
Before us, Ld. AR has submitted that there was a dispute between the partners due to which no return was filed by the assessee. Further, no compliance to the notices issued by the department could be made as these were sent to one of the partners who did not make these available to the main partner on account of the ongoing dispute. Ld. AR has, therefore, requested and the matter may be restored back to the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication on merits.
Ld. DR has also not objected to the aforesaid proposition.
After hearing both the parties and in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the Juri ictional Assessing Officer (JAO) for fresh adjudication on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to make requisite compliance before the Ld. AO.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 19.09.2025 PAWAN SINGH
RENU JAUHRI
(JUDICIAL MEMBER)
(ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)
Place: Mumbai
Dated: 19.09.2025
Divya R. Nandgaonkar
Stenographer
P a g e | 4
ITA No 4457/Mum/2025 AY 2013-14
Shree Hari Builders
आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to:
1. अिीिार्थी / The Appellant
2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT
4. तिभागीय प्रतितिति, आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai
5. गार्ड फाईि / Guard file.
सत्यातिि प्रति ////
आदेशािुसार / BY ORDER,
सहायक िंजीकार (Asstt.