ASHOK HEMANDAS ADNANI,ULHASNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD KALYAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1465/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 June 2026AY 2014-154 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that both the assessment order and the appellate order were passed ex parte. In the interest of substantial justice, the Tribunal set aside the appellate order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing an adequate opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex parte due to non-attendance, despite a request for adjournment. The assessee contended that the lower authorities passed orders without a proper opportunity to be heard and without adjudicating the issues on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred by passing ex parte orders without providing an effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee and adjudicating the grounds on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI JAGADISH

For Respondent: Shri Surendra Mohan ( SR. DR. )
Pronounced: 29/06/2026

आदेश / ORDER PER SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

Present appeal filed by assesse arises out of the order passed by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 24/11/2025 for A.Y. 2014-15, on the following grounds of appeal:-

“1) The Ld AO has made addition of Rs 1,32,29,709 The Ld AO have made additions on the basis of credits in the bank account. The credits in our bank were not forming part of our turnover We were engaged in bill discounting activities, hence, only net commission income is to be considered as declared by us in our return of income 2) The Ld AO has made an addition on the basis of Section 69A which is not relevant to our case Section 69A is attracted when there is unexplained assets found with the assessee. However, in the present case, we have proper explanation for the transactions in our bank account.The profits were correctly declared in our return of 1

ITA 1465/MUM/2026 ASHOK HEMANDAS ADNANI income and just because there were credits in our bank account doesn t mean that the entire amount is our profit. There were equivalent amount of payments as well as we are involved in business activities.

3) The Ld AO has disallowed the deductions claimed u s 80C for Rs 1,00,000 The claim of deductions is on the basis of actual investments made and hence it cannot be disallowed

4) The Ld. CIT (Appeals) have not considered any of our Grounds of Appeal and dismissed the case due to non attendance. However we have also submitted request for an adjournment of 10 days as our CA was busy in filing Income tax Returns and audits

5) The Appellant hereby request your honor to consider the facts and DR0P the Addition made by the Learned Income tax officer of Rs.1,32,29,709

6) The Appellant also request your honor to give us one more opportunity to attend the case before the Learned Income tax officer OR the case shall be remand back to the concerned Assessing Authority to submit the documents and to attend the fresh hearing.

7) The above Grounds are crave to add, amend OR alter at any time before the final date of hearing.”

2.

Though the assessee has raised several grounds of appeal, the primary grievance of the assessee, as emanating from the grounds raised, is that both the assessment order and the impugned appellate order have been passed ex parte without affording an effective opportunity of being heard and without adjudicating the issues on merits. Therefore, all the grounds are taken up together for the sake of convenience and are disposed of by this common order.

3.

The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte without considering any of the grounds raised by the assessee on merits. It was submitted that the assessee had sought an adjournment of ten days as its Chartered Accountant was occupied with the filing of income tax returns and tax audit reports. However, the said request was not considered and the appeal came to be dismissed for non-prosecution. The Ld. AR, therefore, prayed that the impugned order be set aside and the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 2

ITA 1465/MUM/2026 ASHOK HEMANDAS ADNANI 3.1. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the lower authorities.

We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in light of the records placed before us.

4.

We find that both the assessment order as well as the impugned appellate order have been passed ex parte. Further, the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal without adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee on merits. In the interest of substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the impugned appellate order and restore the entire appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh in accordance with law after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to extend full cooperation and furnish all the details and evidences as may be called for by the Ld. CIT(A). We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issues involved and all the grounds raised by the assessee are left open.

Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 29/06/2026.

Sd/- Sd/- JAGADISH BEENA PILLAI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 29/06/2026 SC, Sr. P.S. 3

ITA 1465/MUM/2026 ASHOK HEMANDAS ADNANI Copy to: ASHOK HEMANDAS ADNANI, BLOCK NO C 654, ROOM NO 1308, NETAJI C BLOCK ROAD 1 ,ULHASNAGAR, KALYAN-421004, MAHARASHTRA

INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT MOHAN 2 PLAZA KALYAN WEST, KALYAN-421203, MAHARASHTRA

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

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →