GOWD SARASWAT BRAHMAN SABHA MUMBAI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION 1(3) MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 123/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 August 2026AY 2021-222 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, considering the lack of submissions and the need for proper adjudication, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision. This decision is subject to a cost of Rs. 11,000/- to be deposited by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an order passed by the ADIT-CPC before the CIT(A). Despite multiple opportunities, the assessee failed to provide submissions or documents, leading to non-compliance.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal should be dismissed due to non-compliance or remanded for fresh adjudication when crucial documents and submissions are missing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & HON’BLE PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Respondent: Mr. Rajgopal K Parthsarthy, Ld. D.R
Pronounced: 19.08.2026

आदेश / ORDER

PER: NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 07.11.2025, 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.Y. 2021-22.

2.

Brief facts relevant for adjudication of the instant appeal are that in this case, the Assessee challenged the order dated 03.12.2022 u/s. 154

IT A N o. 123/ MUM /20 26 Go wd Saraswat Brahman Sabha

of the Act passed by the ADIT- CPC, Bangalore by filing first appeal before the ld. Commissioner, however despite affording seven opportunities, the Assessee except requesting for adjournments, eventually made no- compliance and/or filed no submissions and documents therefore, we are inclined to dismiss the appeal however, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, specific to the effect that in the absence of relevant submission and documents, the issues involved remains to be adjudicated in its right perspective and proper manner and therefore, for just and proper decision of the case and substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the instant case to the file of the ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to cost of Rs.11,000/-, to be deposited in the Revenue Department under 'other heads', within 15 days of this order.

3.

In the result Assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19.08.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- PRABHASH SHANKAR NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER (Tarun Kushwaha) 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.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →