SHRI JAYANT B SHAH ,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

PER RENU JAUHRI, AM This appeal of the assessee is directed against order dated 29.02.2024 passed by the Ld. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Prayagraj [hereinafter shall be referred as ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2021-22, raising following grounds: 1. The orders passed by the learned lower authorities are bad in law and bad in facts 2. The learned First Appellate Authority have grossly erred in passing ex-parte order, inasmuch as, the appellant had specific reques 3. The Int initio v proviso and se 4. The Int initio v is beyo Act, 19 5. The lea an adj accoun assign 6. The lea an adj recours claimed Act - N claim. 7. Having judicia 131/- 2. Brief facts of th income declaring i Intimation u/s 143 determining the inc adjustment to ret Rs.33,72,131/- after Since no opportunity adjustment, the ass against the intimatio issued by the Ld. CIT and 08.04.2025. Sin ITA cally requested for adjournment & said st was not declined. timation issued u/s 143 (1) of the I. T. Ac void inasmuch as no notice (Intimation) in o to sec. 143 (1) (a) of the I. T. Act, 1961 erved on the appellant. timation issued u/s 143 (1) of the I. T. Ac void inasmuch as impugned adjustment t ond the scope & ambit of section 143 (1) 961. arned Assessing Officer has grossly err justment to returned income at Rs.33, nt of Long Term Capital Gain - No reas ed for impugned adjustment. arned Assessing Officer has grossly err justment to returned income at Rs. 33, se to sec. 50 C (1) even though the a d the application of provisions of section No reason has been assigned for rejection g regard to the facts of the case, provisio al propositions, impugned adjustment a to returned income is unwarranted and u he case are that the assessee income of Rs.65,52,150/- o (1) was issued by the CPC come at Rs.99,24,290/-. The turned income by making invoking provisions of section y was given to the assessee bef sessee filed an appeal before on u/s 143(1) of the Act. Thre T(A) to the assessee on 02.02.20 nce no reply was furnished by Shri Jayant B. Shah 2 A No. 4480/MUM/2025 d adjournment ct, 1961, is ab- n terms of First 1, was issued ct, 1961, is ab- to total income (a) of the I. T. red in making 72, 131/- on son has been red in making ,72, 131/- by appellant had 50 C (2) of the of appellant's ns of law and at Rs. 33,72, uncalled for. e filed return of on 04.12.2021. on 28.12.2022 CPC made an g addition of 50C of the Act. fore making the the Ld. CIT(A) ee notices were 024, 01.04.2025 the assessee to any of these notices, without examining th 3. Aggrieved with preferred an appeal b 4. We have heard materials on record dismissed the appea grounds taken by the appropriate to restore on merits after givi assessee is also dire CIT(A). 5. In the result, statistical purposes. Order pronoun (KAVITHA RA JUDICIAL M Mumbai; Dated: 29/08/2025 Rahul Sharma, Sr. P.S.

Copy of the Order forward
1. The Appellant
2. The Respondent.
3. CIT
4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai
ITA

, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the he merits of the case.
the order of the Ld. CIT(A), th before the Tribunal.
the rival submissions and peru
. It is seen that the Ld. CIT al ex-parte without going into th e assessee. In the interest of jus e the matter to Ld. CIT(A) for fre ing proper opportunity to the ected to make requisite compli the appeal of the assessee ced in the open Court on 29/0
/-
S
AJAGOPAL)
(RENU
MEMBER
ACCOUNTA ded to :

Shri Jayant B. Shah
3
A No. 4480/MUM/2025
appeal ex-parte he assessee has sed the relevant
T(A) has simply he merits of the stice, we deem it esh adjudication e assessee. The iance before Ld.
is allowed for 08/2025. JAUHRI)
ANT MEMBER

////

ITA

BY ORDER

(Assistant Re

ITAT, Mu

Shri Jayant B. Shah
4
A No. 4480/MUM/2025
R, gistrar) umbai