SHAILESH SHIVJI SHAH,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 31(2)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2603/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 August 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not decide the case on merits and the assessee had reasons for non-compliance. Therefore, the assessee was granted another opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 26,55,000/- under Section 68 as unexplained credit based on bogus GST invoices. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal dismissal by CIT(A) for non-prosecution was justified, and if the assessee should be given another opportunity to argue the case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH; MUMBAI

Hearing: 23.07.2026Pronounced: 11.08.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH; MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2603/Mum/2026 (Assessment Year: 2018-19)

Shailesh Shivji Shah Income Tax Officer, Ward 901, Shiv Sadan, 31(2)(1), Vidhyaniketan Marg, Mg Road, vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Mumbai, Goregaon West, Mumbai, Maharashtra, 400051. Maharashtra, 400062.

PAN: AOWPS3401F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Hema Sharma, CA For Revenue : Shri Ashok Charan, SR DR Date of Hearing : 23.07.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 11.08.2026 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [‘Ld.CIT(A)’], dated 09.02.2026, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19, wherein the assessee has taken various grounds of appeal, wherein effectively the addition amounting to Rs. 26,55,000/- u/s. 68 of the Act has been challenged by the assessee.

2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee has filed its return of income declaring total income of Rs. 6,84,030/-. Subsequently, the case was reopened and AO issued notice u/s. 148, basis information that the assessee has taken bogus GST invoices from Advanced Computers

ITA No. 2603/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2018-19 Shailesh Shivji Shah and Mobile India Limited for mobile phones sold to them and claimed Input Tax Credit without supply of goods. Thereafter, after issuing the notices and calling for necessary information and documentation, the Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 26,55,000/- as unexplained credit u/s. 68 of the Act, and the assessed income was determined at Rs. 33,39,030/-. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who has since dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of non-prosecution. Against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us.

3.

During the course of hearing, the learned AR submitted that though the notices were issued by the ld. CIT(A), however, the same have remained non-complied with, for reasons beyond the control of the assessee and it was prayed that in the interest of justice, the matter may be remanded to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

4.

The ld. DR has been heard, who has not raised any objection where the matter is set aside to the file of ld. CIT(A).

5.

After hearing both the parties and considering the material available on record, we find that the matter has not been decided on merits of the case by the ld. CIT(A), and the assessee has submitted necessary explanation as to the reasons for non-compliance before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we find that the assessee be granted one more opportunity, and the matter is remanded to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

ITA No. 2603/Mum/2026; A.Y. 2018-19 Shailesh Shivji Shah

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 11.08.2026

Sd/- Sd/- SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)

Mumbai, Dated: 11.08.2026 Karishma J. Pawar, SR. PS

Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file

By Order

Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →