INDIRA CHANDRAKANT SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 4(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITSSA 6649/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 September 2026AY 2015-163 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal without adjudication and for want of prosecution. The Tribunal noted that the Ld.CIT(A) has the role of an adjudicator and is supposed to decide on both legal and factual grounds, not dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. The observation that granting relief on technical/legal grounds would send a wrong message to the taxpaying community was deemed inappropriate, as such an approach fails to provide justice. The Tribunal found that the Ld.CIT(A)'s order was passed on a gazette holiday, though this was not the primary reason for setting aside the order. Consequently, the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate upon all grounds taken by the assessee, both on merits and technical/legal grounds, by passing a speaking order after providing a proper opportunity to the assessee. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Indira Chandrakant Shah, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Mumbai Bench, challenging the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.CIT(A)] dated 26.01.2026 for Assessment Year 2015-16. The assessee contended that the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed her appeal for want of prosecution without any adjudication. The Ld.CIT(A) had observed that the assessee should not expect immunity from assessment orders solely on technical claims and that restraining from divulging facts sends a wrong message. The assessee further submitted that similar appeals, dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A) with identical reasoning, were restored to the Ld.CIT(A) by a co-ordinate bench of the ITAT for adjudication on merits and legal grounds after providing an opportunity of hearing.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Ld.CIT(A) erred in dismissing the assessee's appeal for want of prosecution without adjudicating on the grounds of appeal, contrary to his role as an adjudicator? (Question of law and fact, concerning the procedural fairness and scope of the Ld.CIT(A)'s powers). Assessee's Contentions: - The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudication, which is incorrect. The Ld.CIT(A) should have adjudicated on both legal and factual grounds. - The Ld.CIT(A)'s observation that immunity from assessment orders should not be granted solely on technical claims is inappropriate when the assessee is entitled to relief on such grounds. - A co-ordinate bench of the ITAT has restored similar matters to the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits and legal grounds after providing an opportunity of hearing. Revenue's Contentions: - No specific contentions are recorded for the revenue in the judgment.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI

Before: S HRI SANJAY GARG & SHRI JAGADISH

Pronounced: 10.09.2026

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [herein referred to as “Ld.CIT(A)”] dated 26.01.2026 for the Assessment Year 2015-16.

IT (SS) A No.6649/Mum/2026 Indira Chandrakant Shah :: 2 :: 2. At the outset, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without any adjudication and for want of prosecution. Further, the Ld.CIT(A) has observed as under:

“It cannot be expected that the assessee would be entitled to immunity from assessment order only through legal/technical claims. It sends a wrong message to the entire taxpaying community if assessment order is adjudicated in favour of the appellant only on legal/procedural/technical aspects while the assessee restrains herself from divulging the facts." 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has further submitted that the other appeals of the assessee relating to the same search action dismissed by the Ld.CIT(A) giving identical reasoning came for adjudication before the co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, where upon, the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal vide order dated 30.06.2026 passed in ITA (SS) A No.3805/Mum/2026 & Ors. has restored the matter to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the grounds of appeal both legal as well as on merits, after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

We note that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed the impugned order as well as the orders in other appeals as referred to above on 26.01.2026, which is a gazette holiday on account of Republic Day of India. However, the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed without adjudication on the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee both on merits as well as technical/legal grounds. It is pertinent to mention here that the Ld.CIT(A) was supposed to adjudicate upon grounds of appeal of the assessee on merits and he was not supposed to dismiss the appeal of the assessee for want of prosecution. Further, the Ld.CIT(A), while adjudicating upon the appeal of the assessee, was given the role of an adjudicator and not a role of tax collector. He was supposed to adjudicate upon both the legal as well as factual grounds taken by the assessee. If the assessee deserves relief on technical/legal grounds, the same can’t be denied to the assessee by stating that it will send a wrong message to the entire tax payer

IT (SS) A No.6649/Mum/2026 Indira Chandrakant Shah :: 3 :: community. Such an approach of the Ld.CIT(A), in our view, in fact, sends a wrong message as failure of the Department to give justice to the litigants. In view of this, the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is set-aside and matter is restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate upon all the grounds taken by the assessee both on merits as well as technical/legal grounds by way of passing a speaking order after giving proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case. With the above observations, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 10.09.2026.

Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai Dated: 10.09.2026 Copy to: 1 Indira Chandrakant Shah, C-802, Satyam Skyline, Sola Charrasta, Naranpura, Ahmedabad. 2 The DCIT, Central Circle-4(3), Mumbai. 3 THE PCIT / CIT, Mumbai 4 THE D.R., ITAT, MUMBAI BENCH 5 GUARD FILE

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →