VIMAL PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BELGAVI, KARNATAKA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2, BELGAVI, KARNATAKA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and granted the assessee one more opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's assessment was completed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 260 r.w.s. 144B, with an addition made for unexplained work-in-progress and stock. The assessee's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-compliance despite ample opportunities.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 143(3),Section 260,Section 144B,Section 69C,Section 144,Section 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, ‘DB’ PANAJI
Before: DR.MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 12.02.2025 framed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi arising out of Assessment Order dated 21.07.2023 passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.260 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is a Private Limited company engaged in the business of Real Estate and deriving income from business and other sources. In the instant case, assessment for A.Y. 2018-19 completed u/s.143(3A) r.w.s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act on 20.04.2021
making addition of Rs.5,06,62,238/- u/s.69C of the Act on account of unexplained work-in-progress and stock in Trade. Thereafter, assessee approached Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka challenging the Best Judgment assessment u/s.144 r.w.s.144B of the Act passed by the ld. Assessing Officer on the ground of inadequate opportunity provided during the course of assessment proceedings by filing Writ Petition No.101707 of 2022. Hon’ble Court vide judgment dated 22.04.2022 remitted the matter to the second respondent as petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing. Thereafter, ld. Assessing Officer carried out the assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.260 of the Act and the assessee filed replies on 05.05.2023, 02.06.2023 and 05.06.2023 to the notices issued by the Assessing Officer. However, certain details as called for by the Assessing Officer were not supplied and ld.Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings assessing income at 1,36,22,408/-.
Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before ld.CIT(A) but with a delay of six months. Ld.CIT(A) condoned the delay but in absence of any submissions/compliance from the side of assessee despite providing ample opportunities to the assessee, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine holding as under :
“5.3 During the appellate proceedings, no submission has been received from the appellant whereas ample opportunities were provided.
4 Since the assessee has failed to furnish any detail or documents which was asked by the AO during the assessment proceedings whereas enough opportunities were provided by the AO, he has also failed to furnish the same during appellate proceedings. He has even
failed to furnish copies of muster rolls w.r.t. payment of wages as well as vouchers of expenses under the Head building materials debited to the P&L Account. It seems he has nothing to submit regarding the same. Therefore, after going through the assessment order and the materials available on the record, I am of the opinion that there is no reason to interfere with the order of the AO and the same is being upheld. Hence the relevant grounds of appeal are dismissed.
Now the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal assailing the impugned order passed by ld.CIT(A) exparte qua the assessee contending that ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution and also erred in not adjudicating the grounds on merit. It is also asserted that the authorities have erred in rejecting audited books of account and not taking into cognizance that the assessee regularly follows Project Completion method. Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that due to unavoidable circumstances there was non-compliance before ld.CIT(A) and the assessee possesses all the requisite details to substantiate the grounds of appeal. Therefore, prayer made to afford one more opportunity to plead its grounds of appeal by remitting the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adjudication on merits.
On the other hand, ld. DR supported the order of ld.CIT(A).
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record placed before us. It is an admitted fact that assessee furnished replies but certain details could not be provided in the course of assessment proceedings. Also there was non- compliance before ld.CIT(A).
We however considering the factual matrix and also the prayer made by ld.Counsel for the assessee, deem it appropriate to give one more opportunity to the assessee to go before ld.CIT(A) and adduce evidences in support of its grounds of appeal. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the set aside proceedings shall afford reasonable opportunity to the assessee consider the documents to be filed by the assessee and then pass a speaking order as contemplated u/s.250(6) of the Act. Assessee is directed to provide updated email id and contact detail to the department for receiving the notices from ITBA portal. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Impugned order is set aside and the effective grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 30th day of June, 2026. (VINAY BHAMORE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji/Pune; दिन ांक / Dated : 30th June, 2026. Satish
Satish Kumar Madishetty आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेपिि / Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपील र्थी / The Appellant. 1. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.
The Pr. CIT concerned. विभ गीय प्रतितनधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, Panaji 4. ‘DB’ Bench / DR, ITAT, Panaji ‘DB’ Bench ग र्ड फ़ इल / Guard File. 5. आिेश नुस र / BY ORDER,
////
More judgments on Section 260
- Kuldip Kohi, West Delhi vs ITO Ward 45(1), DelhiITA 7358/DEL/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2017-18
- Birla Furukawa Fibre Optics Private… vs Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Income…ITA 178/PAN/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed7 Aug 2026AY 2021-22
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Pratyaksh Apparels Private Limited, DelhiITA 8054/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Jul 2026AY 2016-17
- Syds Hotels & Resorts Private Limited, Delhi vs ITO, Ward 22(4), DelhiITA 1782/DEL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed10 Jul 2026AY 2012-13
- Rani Promoter Private Limited, Delhi vs Jao, DelhiITA 1628/DEL/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed8 Jul 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026