HIMMAT MANOHARLAL KOTHARI,NAVI-MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 28(1)(1) MUMBAI, NAVI-MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3435/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 June 2026AY 2023-243 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex parte order of the CIT(A) and restored the matter for fresh adjudication. The assessee was directed to cooperate with the proceedings, and the CIT(A) was asked to provide an effective opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) as the assessee failed to submit replies to notices and did not file an application under Rule 46A. The assessee contended that documents submitted were not considered.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex parte without considering the documents submitted by the assessee and whether the assessee was provided with an adequate opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

Hearing: 23.06.2026Pronounced: 25.06.2026

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3435/MUM/2026 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Himmat Manoharlal Kothari Income Tax Officer, Shop no 15,Om Arcade, Ward 28(1)(1), Mumbai Sector-20,Turbhe, Navi Mumbai - 400705 Vs. Maharashtra (PAN: ALLPK4828Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee : Shri V.D. Parmar, Advocate Revenue : Smt. Sujatha Iyyanger, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 23.06.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 25.06.2026 O R D E R PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi, vide order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1085159982(1), dated 27.01.2026, passed against the assessment order by Assessment Unit, u/s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 21.03.2025, for Assessment Year 2023-24.

2.

In the present appeal, we note that the impugned assessment order is an ex parte order passed u/s. 144. From the table in para-2, it is noted that assessee had made partial replies to the proposed addition. At the first appellate stage, ld. CIT(A) noted that there is no application

2 ITA No. 3435/Mum/2026 Himmat Manoharlal Kothari, AY 2023-24

made under rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (The Rules). He also notes in paras (x) at page-10 about the various notices issued fixing the date of hearing for which assessee always sought adjournment. Also for the last notice issued on 12.11.2025, no reply was submitted by the assessee. Ld. CIT(A) thus in absence of any submissions made on the merits of the case proceeded to adjudicate on the matter based on material available on record and dismissed the appeal so filed by the assessee.

3.

Before us, ld. Counsel for the assessee placed on record paper book containing 103 pages. In the certificate, forming part of the index to the paper book, it is submitted that all these documents before the ld. CIT(A), who did not consider the same while dealing with the merits of the case and taking an adverse view. Ld. Counsel thus prayed that these documents ought to have been considered before dismissing the appeal.

4.

The learned Departmental Representative fairly submitted that she would have no serious objection if the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

5.

Having considered the aforesaid submission and the material placed on record, we are of the opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the impugned ex parte order is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to his file with a direction to decide the appeal afresh on merits and in accordance with law after affording due and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The

3 ITA No. 3435/Mum/2026 Himmat Manoharlal Kothari, AY 2023-24

assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation in the appellate proceedings. Since the matter is being restored on account of the bona fide reasons explained by the assessee without adjudication on merits, we deem it appropriate to observe that the learned CIT(A) shall endeavour to dispose of the appeal as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issues involved and all contentions are left open.

6.

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 25 June, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Girish Agrawal) Judicial Member (Accountant Member) Dated: 25 June, 2026 MP, Sr.P.S. Copy to : 1 The Appellant 2 The Respondent 3 DR, ITAT, Mumbai 4 Guard File 5 CIT BY ORDER,

(Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →