M/S. SHREE HARI BUILDERS ,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 17(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4457/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 September 2025AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication on merits, providing the assessee with a due opportunity to be heard and make necessary compliances.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to file an income tax return for AY 2013-14. Despite notices regarding a property sale, the assessee did not comply, leading to an ex-parte assessment order. The first appellate authority also dismissed the appeal ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred in not providing sufficient opportunity of hearing and in completing the assessment/appeal ex-parte without proper appreciation of facts.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 148,Section 144,Section 148B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI PAWAN SINGH & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

Hearing: 25.08.2025Pronounced: 19.09.2025

(धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-2014) M/s. Shree Hari v/s. Income Tax Officer, Ward Builders बिाम 17(3)(1), Mumbai 139 2nd Floor, Seksaria Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 to C- Chambers, N.M. Road, 43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Fort, Mumbai 400023 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.

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. 2. 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 jurisdiction 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.

4. 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.”

3.

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.

4.

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.

5.

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 Jurisdictional 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.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 19.09.2025

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →