ACIT, CIRCLE-3, THANE, THANE vs. SKYTOUCH DEVELOPERS, THANE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 9493/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 July 2026AY 2019-204 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to await the decision of the Bombay High Court on a related issue. The CIT(A) is to decide in favor of the assessee if the High Court rules in their favor, otherwise, adjudicate other grounds on merits.

What were the facts?

The Department appealed the CIT(A)'s order which allowed the assessee's appeal based on a precedent. The CIT(A) had not adjudicated other grounds raised by the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal solely on a precedent whose finality was under challenge. The impact of a retrospective amendment to Section 147A and pending High Court adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN

PER SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the Department against the order of Ld. CIT(A) vide DIN: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1081776651(1) dated 15-Oct-2025 for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal:

1.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in allowing the appeal of the assessee merely by placing reliance on the decision in the case of Hexaware, without appreciating that the Department has already filed an SLP/appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the said decision, and therefore the said decision has not attained finality and cannot be treated as a binding precedent.

2.

It is humbly requested that present appeal may be filed in accordance with the CBDT's Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024 as per Para 3.1h of the said Circular. The Order of the CIT(A) may kindly be vacated and the matter may be set-aside to the file of the AO for fresh assessment.

3.

The appellant craves leave to add, amend, modify or delete any of the above grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal, if considered necessary.

2.

All the grounds raised by the Revenue are interrelated and interconnected and relates to challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) in allowing the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, I have decided to adjudicate these grounds through the present consolidated order.

3.

I have heard the counsel for both the parties, perused the material placed on record, the judgments cited before me, and also the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities. From the records, I noticed that the appeal of the assessee was decided by the Ld. CIT(A) merely by relying upon the decision in the case of Hexaware vs. ACIT (2024) 162 Taxman 225, and the other grounds raised by the assessee were not adjudicated at all by the Ld. CIT(A).

4.

During the course of hearing, it was submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide its order dated 10.04.2026 in the case of Income Tax Officer vs. Tej Pratap Singh and Others (2026) 185 taxmann.com 1007 (SC), remanded the issue back to the Hon’ble High Courts, including the Hon’ble Bombay High Court, for fresh adjudication in light of the retrospective amendment introduced in Section 147A by the Finance Act, 2026.

5.

Since the Hon’ble High Court is yet to decide the controversy, and it is a matter of fact that the Ld. CIT(A), in the present case, has not adjudicated the matter on merits, therefore, in light of the above discussion and as per the request made by the Ld. AR, the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, keeping all the contentions of both the parties open.

6.

The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to await the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court on this issue. In case the Hon’ble Bombay High Court decides the issue in favour of the taxpayers, the Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the matter in accordance with law in favour of the taxpayers. However, if the Hon’ble High Court decides the issue in favour of the Revenue, then, in that eventuality, the Ld. CIT(A) shall adjudicate the other grounds raised by the assessee on merits.

7.

With these directions, the matter stands restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A).

8.

It is made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the controversy, and all the issues raised by Revenue are kept open for adjudication by the Ld. CIT(A) in accordance with law.

9.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 31.07.2026.

Sd/- SANDEEP GOSAIN JUDICIAL MEMBER 3 Mumbai Dated: 31.07.2026 RY-SrPS

Copy to: ACIT, CIRCLE-3, THANE, ROOM NO. 02, B WING, 6TH FLOOR, 1 ASHAR IT PARK, WAGLE INDL. ESTATE, THANE-400604, MAHARASHTRA SKYTOUCH DEVELOPERS, SHOP NO. 11, MONALISA SHOPPING 2 CENTRE, HARINIWAS CIRCLE, LBS ROAD, THANE(W), THANE-400602, MAHARASHTRA 3 THE PCIT / CIT, 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

More judgments on Section 147A

All 31 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →