What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the assessment to the AO for de novo adjudication. The AO was directed to examine all grounds, evidence, and submissions, and afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

The assessee's assessment was completed ex parte by the AO, and the CIT(A) also passed an ex parte order without considering the supporting documents filed by the assessee. The assessee contended that it was prevented from effectively representing its case.

What were the issues?

Whether the appellate authorities erred in passing ex parte orders without considering the assessee's evidence and submissions, thereby denying a proper opportunity of being heard.

Aventus Buildcon Limited (… vs Dy. Comm. of Income Tax Circle… | ITAT Mumbai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE & SHRI JAGADISH, HON’BLE

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई पीठें, म ुंबई INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI BENCH: A BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA 8434/MUM/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2013-14) AVENTUS BUILDCON LIMITED DY. COMM. OF INCOME ( FORMERLY RATNAAKAR TAX CIRCLE 5(3)(1) INFRASTRUCTURE LTD ) 573, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, 101, GAGANGIRI TOWER 25/29 M.K ROAD, Vs. DR. DESHMUKH LANE V.P MUMBAI-400020, ROAD,, MUMBAI-400004, MAHARASHTRA MAHARASHTRA अपीलधर्थी Appellant प्रत्यर्थी Respondent

Permanent Account Number of Assessee: AAECR8108B

अपीलधर्थी द्वारा/Appellant represented by: Shri M. S. Mathuria, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी द्वारा/Respondent represented by: Shri Surendra Mohan ( SR. DR. ) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusion of hearing: 01-Jul-2026 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement: 18-09-2026 आदेश / ORDER PER SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER: The present appeal filed by the assessee arises out of the order dated 27/10/2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”] for A.Y. 2013- 14.

The assessee has challenged the impugned order, inter alia, on the ground that the Ld. CIT(A) passed the order ex parte without 1

ITA 8434/MUM/2025 AVENTUS BUILDCON LIMITED ( FORMERLY RATNAAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD ) considering the supporting exhibits/evidences filed by the assessee and thereby confirmed the action of the Ld. AO, who had also completed the assessment ex parte.

Brief facts of the case are that the assessment proceedings culminated in an ex parte assessment order passed by the Ld. AO. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). It is the grievance of the assessee that supporting documents/evidences were placed on record during the appellate proceedings; however, the same were not considered while disposing of the appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) proceeded to pass the impugned order dated 27/10/2025 ex parte.

The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee was prevented from effectively representing its case before the authorities below and that the supporting exhibits/evidences furnished by the assessee have not been examined. It was therefore prayed that an opportunity may be granted to the assessee to substantiate its case before the Ld.AO.

4.1. The Ld.DR relied on the orders passed by the authorities below.

We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in light of the record placed before us.

We note that the assessment itself was completed ex parte by the Ld.AO. The first appellate proceedings also culminated in an ex parte order. The specific grievance raised by the assessee before us

ITA 8434/MUM/2025 AVENTUS BUILDCON LIMITED ( FORMERLY RATNAAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD ) is that the supporting exhibits/evidences filed by it were not considered by the Ld. CIT(A).

5.1. In our considered opinion, the issues arising in the present appeal require proper examination of the evidences and supporting material relied upon by the assessee. Since the assessment was completed ex parte and the evidences relied upon by the assessee have not been examined on merits by the Ld. AO, we deem it appropriate, in the interest of substantial justice, to provide one more opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the Ld. AO.

5.2. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the entire assessment to the file of the Ld. AO for de novo adjudication. The Ld. AO is directed to examine all the grounds, supporting exhibits/evidences and submissions that may be filed by the assessee and thereafter frame the assessment afresh in accordance with law. Needless to state, the Ld. AO shall afford reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing the order. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the Ld. AO and furnish the requisite details/evidences as may be called for.

5.3. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the additions/issues involved and all contentions of the assessee as well as the Revenue are kept open.

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

ITA 8434/MUM/2025 AVENTUS BUILDCON LIMITED ( FORMERLY RATNAAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD )

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18-09-2026.

Sd/- Sd/- JAGADISH BEENA PILLAI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 18-09-2026 Shamik Sr. P.S.

ITA 8434/MUM/2025 AVENTUS BUILDCON LIMITED ( FORMERLY RATNAAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD )

Copy to: AVENTUS BUILDCON LIMITED (FORMERLY RATNAAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD ), 1 101, GAGANGIRI TOWER 25/29 DR. DESHMUKH LANE V.P ROAD,, MUMBAI-400004, MAHARASHTRA DY. COMM. OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5(3)(1), 2 573, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K ROAD,, MUMBAI-400020, MAHARASHTRA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE TRUE COPY

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A.T., MUMBAI

AVENTUS BUILDCON LIMITED ( FORMERLY RATNAAKAR INFRASTRUCTURE LTD ),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMM. OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 5(3)(1), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments