What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the orders of the AO and CIT(A) and restored the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. This was done to provide the assessee with an opportunity to present their case, subject to payment of costs.

The assessee remained ex parte before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)), leading to assessment and dismissal of appeal respectively. The assessee appealed against these orders.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessment order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice due to lack of opportunity. Whether the addition on account of brought forward loss was justified.

Yield Construction Private Limited vs Central Circle – 6(4) | ITAT Mumbai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN

For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar ( SR. DR. )

PER SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of Ld. 3197020 vide DIN: ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1081665454(1) dated 30-Dec-2025 for the Assessment Year 2023-24. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in sustaining the order of assessment passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard in violation of the principles of natural justice.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs 1,28,792/- made by the Ld. Assessing Officer on account of alleged disallowance of brought forward loss being Rs 1,28,792/- pertaining to AY 2020-21.

The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify, delete, vary and/or withdraw any or all of the grounds of appeal as may be necessary.

The appellant prays before the Hon'ble Tribunal to delete the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT (A) and/ or any other relief as the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit.

From the records, I noticed that the assessee remained ex parte before both the Assessing Officer (AO) as well as the Ld. Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) [Ld. CIT(A)]. Consequently, on the basis of the material available on record, the AO completed the assessment, and the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.

Be that as it may, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issues raised by the assessee, and considering the fact that the assessee could not effectively represent his case before the AO as well as the Ld. CIT(A), I am of the considered view that, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity should be afforded to the assessee to present his case before the AO.

Accordingly, having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it proper to set aside the orders passed by the AO and the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with law, after providing the assessee with adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard. This restoration shall, however, be subject to payment of costs of Rs. 2,000/- by the assessee, which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund. A copy of the receipt evidencing such deposit shall be placed on record before the AO within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order.

The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation during the remand proceedings and shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds.

Before parting, it is made clear that the decision to restore the matter to the file of the AO shall not be construed as expressing any opinion whatsoever on the merits of the controversy involved. The AO shall adjudicate the issues independently, uninfluenced by any observation contained in this order, and strictly in accordance with law.

Needless to mention, the AO shall provide the assessee with adequate and effective opportunity of being heard before passing the fresh order.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 31.07.2026.

Sd/- SANDEEP GOSAIN JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 31.07.2026 RY-SrPS

Copy to: YIELD CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED, 708, GATEWAY PLAZA CHS, A S MARG, 1 HIRANANDANI GARDENS, POWAI, MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400051, MAHARASHTRA

CENTRAL CIRCLE – 6(4), MUMBAI, 2 MUMBAI, MUMBAI-400051, MAHARASHTRA

3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

YIELD CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CENTRAL CIRCLE – 6(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments