What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to pay a cost of Rs. 5,000/- and cooperate with the proceedings.

The assessee failed to appear before the AO and CIT(A) due to notices going unnoticed via email. The assessee claims to have always been interested in pursuing the case and sought an opportunity to be heard.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard. Whether additions on account of LTCG and salary were justified.

Baburao Ramchandra Salunkhe, Navi… vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2026

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Prateek Jain

For Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhari (SR. DR.)

Hearing: 10.03.2026Pronounced: 02.04.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 9212/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2015-16)

Baburao Ramchandra Vs. Income Tax Officer Salunkhe Ward 28(2)(1), Mumbai Flat No. 401, Plot No. 33/34 IT-Office, Vasi Railway Sector -20 Grandeur CHS, Station Building, Navi Kamotha, Navi Mumbai - 400703 PAN/GIR No. BTPPS8043E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Prateek Jain Revenue by Shri Swapnil Choudhari (SR. DR.) Date of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 02.04.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 14.10.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2015-16. The following grounds are reproduced below: “The following grounds of appeal are without prejudice to one other: -

2 ITA No. 9212/Mum/2025

On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant, for the reason mentioned in the impugned order or otherwise. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in making the addition amounting to Rs. 50,00,000/- on account of Long term capital gains earned on the sale of property, for the reason mentioned in the impugned order or otherwise. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case and in law, the L.d. CIT(A) erred in making the addition amounting to Rs. 37,070/- on account of salary earned by the appellant, for the reason mentioned in the impugned order or otherwise. 4. The Appellant craves leaves to alter, amend, withdraw or substitute any ground or grounds or to add any new ground or grounds of appeal on or before the hearing. The Appellant prays this Hon'ble Tribunal to delete the additions made by the Assessing Officer, which is confirmed by the Learned CIT(A). ” 2. At the very outset, we noticed that the assessee was ex parte before the Ld. CIT(A) as well as the AO. It has now been submitted before us that the notices issued through email address went unnoticed, therefore, the assessee could not appear in time before the Revenue Authorities, though he had always been interested in pursuing his case.

The Ld. AR, appearing on behalf of the assessee, has sought an adequate opportunity to be heard by the Revenue Authorities and has undertaken to cooperate with them.

Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that there was

3 ITA No. 9212/Mum/2025

reasonable cause, because of which assessee could not put effective representation before AO as well as Ld. CIT(A). Hence the Bench is of the view that adequate opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before AO. Therefore, considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of AO for deciding the matter afresh by providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Subject to cost of Rs. 5,000/- imposed upon the assessee which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.

Needless to mention that the AO shall provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 02.04.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 02/04/2026

4 ITA No. 9212/Mum/2025

RY, Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. धिभागीय प्रधतधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,मुम्बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy//

उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai

BABURAO RAMCHANDRA SALUNKHE,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-WARD 28(2)(1), MUMBAI, NAVI 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