VISHAL PLASTOMER PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1007/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 June 2026AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT noted the assessee's non-compliance before the CIT(A) but decided to allow another opportunity. A cost of Rs. 5,000/- was imposed on the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction for bad debt, but the AO disallowed Rs. 1,00,00,000/- as it was considered a capital loss. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to non-compliance. The assessee then appealed to the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without adjudicating on merits due to non-compliance, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 148A,Section 36(2),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Chavda, AR
For Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, SR-DR
Hearing: 08.06.2026Pronounced: 15.06.2026

PER NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 25.02.2025 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014-15 in the proceeding u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act [hereinafter referred as “The Act”].

2.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2014-15 on 30.09.2014 declaring total loss of Rs. 14,37,99,657/-. The original assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) on 19.10.2016 as per return. Subsequently, the AO noticed that the assessee

ITA No. 1007/Ahd/2025 Vishal Plastomer Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, AY- 2014-15 2

had claimed deduction of Rs. 15,06,22,125/- on account of bad debt written off. It was found that an amount of Rs.1,00,00,000/- was written off as bad debt in respect of loan/advance given to M/s. Titanic Exports, which was a capital loss and not eligible for deduction as bad debt. Therefore, the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice u/s. 148 of the Act on 31.07.2022, after passing an order u/s. 148A(d) of the Act. The assessment was completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 21.01.2023 at total loss of Rs. 13,37,99,657/-.

3.

Aggrieved with the order of the AO, the assessee had filed an appeal before the first appellate authority, which was decided by the learned CIT(A) vide the impugned order and the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. Th

4.

Now the assessee is in second appeal before us. The following grounds have been taken in this appeal:

1.

The order passed by NFAC is invalid, bad in law and required to be quashed. 2. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of Rs. 1,00,00,000/- made u/s. 36(2) of the Act ignoring submission and evidence. 3. Ld. NFAC erred in law and on facts in not passing order u/s 250(6) of the Act. 4. Appellant prays that appeal may be set aside to the file of AO or CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

5.

Shri Vivek Chavda, the Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee could not make any compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) and, therefore, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed without adjudicating the grounds taken by the assessee on merit. The Ld. AR, therefore,

ITA No. 1007/Ahd/2025 Vishal Plastomer Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, AY- 2014-15 3 requested that the assessee may be allowed another opportunity of being heard by setting aside the matter to the file of Ld. CIT(A).

6.

Per Contra, Shri Rameshwar P Meena, the Ld. SR-DR, supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A). However, he had no objection if the matter was set aside to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for allowing another opportunity to the assessee.

7.

We have considered the request of the assessee. It is found that no compliance was made before the Ld. CIT(A) and no materials were produced in support of the grounds as taken. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the AO. The assessee had not given any reason for non-compliance before the Ld. CIT(A). At the same time, it is not evident from the order of the Ld. CIT(A) as to how many opportunities were allowed to the assessee. We, therefore, deem it proper to impose of cost of Rs. 5,000/- which should be deposited to Prime Minister National Relief Fund within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. Subject to payment of cost, the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to allow one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to make compliance before the Ld. CIT(A) in the course of set aside proceeding and bring on record the evidences and materials in support of the grounds as taken before him. In case the assessee does not make compliance, the Ld. CIT(A) will have liberty to pass the order on merits as per law on the basis of materials available on record.

ITA No. 1007/Ahd/2025 Vishal Plastomer Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT, AY- 2014-15 4

8.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the Court on 15/06/2026 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA) (SANJAY GARG) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated – 15th June, 2026 Neelesh, Sr. PS (True Copy) आदेश क� आदेश क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : आदेश आदेश क� क� �ितिलिप �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत अ�ेिषत 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण / DR, ITAT, 6. गाड� फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार आदेशानुसार पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) उप/सहायक उप सहायक पंजीकार उप उप सहायक सहायक पंजीकार पंजीकार आयकर अपीलीय आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण अहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →