DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI vs. GEMINI ALUMINIUM TRADING COMAPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6092/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 September 2026AY 2011-123 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeals could not be adjudicated on merits due to the absence of the assessment orders. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed in limine for want of admission.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed appeals against the orders of the CIT(A) for various assessment years. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and notices could not be served. Crucially, the assessment orders, which are foundational to the appeals, were not available on record.

What were the issues?

Whether appeals can be adjudicated on merits without the relevant assessment orders being on record. The procedural requirement of having foundational assessment orders for appellate review.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & HON’BLE RAKESH KUMAR LODHA

For Appellant: Shri Rajeshkumar Gandhi
Pronounced: 08.09.2026

आदेश / ORDER

PER: BENCH These appeals have been preferred by the Revenue against the orders dated 22.0.08.2025 and 31.07.2025 impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, “Ld. Commissioner”) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, “the Act”) for the A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14.

ITA No.6092, 6093, 7033 & 7034/MUM/2025 Gemini Aluminium Trading Company Pvt. Limited 2. At the outset, though notices for hearing were issued to the Assessee, none appeared nor was any adjournment sought. Further, the notice sent through the Ld. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer could not be served at the address stated in Form No. 36, as the Assessee was reported not to be available there. We, therefore, proceed ex parte qua the Assessee on the basis of the material available on record.

3.

During hearing, it was noticed that the relevant assessment orders, from which the impugned appellate orders emanate, were not available on record. The Ld. DR was afforded opportunity to produce the same, but he submitted that despite sincere efforts, the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer was unable to furnish them.

4.

We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. The assessment orders are foundational documents necessary to ascertain the additions/disallowances made, the findings of the AO and the precise controversy adjudicated by the Ld. Commissioner. In their absence, the appeals cannot be effectively adjudicated on merits.

5.

Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed in limine, being not admitted, for want of the relevant assessment orders.

6.

However, liberty is granted to the Revenue to seek recall of this order by filing an appropriate application along with the respective assessment orders. Such application, if filed, shall be considered in accordance with law.

7.

We deem it appropriate to observe that it is unusual and a matter of concern that the relevant assessment orders are stated to be unavailable or untraceable, particularly when such orders form part of the official assessment and appellate records required to be maintained by the concerned authorities of the Revenue. The Revenue may, therefore, take appropriate steps to trace,

ITA No.6092, 6093, 7033 & 7034/MUM/2025 Gemini Aluminium Trading Company Pvt. Limited reconstruct, or retrieve the relevant assessment records, in accordance with the prescribed procedure.

8.

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed in limine, being not admitted, with the aforesaid liberty.

Order pronounced in the open court on 08.09.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- RAKESH KUMAR LODHA NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER (TarunKushwaha) Sr. Private Secretary

Copy to: The Appellant The Respondent The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai The DR Concerned Bench

//True Copy// By Order

Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →