MR. ROHIT RAMESH KAPOOR,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 42(3)(2), MUMBAI
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“D” BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBERAND
SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mr. Rohit Ramesh Kapoor
S/o. Ramesh Chandra Kapoor, 301,
3rd Floor, Exotica Apartment, Plot
No. 91, Sector 12, Vashi,
Navi Mumbai-400703. PAN: AVDPK8131E
Vs
ITO, Ward-42(3)(2) Mumbai
Room No. 609, Kautilya Bhawan
C-41 to C-43, G Block, BKC
Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051. (Appellant)
(Respondent )
Assessee Represented by :
Shri V.D. Parmar, Advocate
Department Represented by :
Shri Annavaran Kasuri, Sr. DR
Date of Institution
:
07.04.2025
Date of Conclusion of hearing
:
05.08.2025
Date of Pronouncement of Order
:
05.08.2025
Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act
PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER;
1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of Ld. CIT(A)/ NFAC dated 13.02.2025 for A.Y. 2015-16.The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -
1.On facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) erred in not deciding grounds of appeal relating to juri ictional issue of notice u/s 148 of the I T Act, 1961. 2. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law ld. CIT(A) erred in not deciding ground of appeal relating to conducting of the proceedings u/s 148A and u/s 148 by juri ictional AO in non-faceless manner which is contrary to Faceless Scheme of faceless assessment of the I T Act, 1961. Hence, assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 is bad in law. Reliance is placed on decision of juri ictional H C in case of Hexaware Technoligies Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT (2024) 162
taxmann.com 225 (Bom).
3. The appellant craves leave to consider each of the above ground of appeal as independent and without prejudice to each other and craves leave to add, alter, modify or delete any or all grounds of appeal.”
Mr. Rohit Ramesh Kapoor
2
Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that assessee is a Non-Resident Indian (NRI). The assessee sold and purchases immovable property during the relevant financial year. The case of assessee was reopened on the basis of information available in the record of department. During the assessment, no notice either under section 148 or any other notice was served upon the assessee. The assessment was completed under section 144. On coming to know about the ex-pate assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) restored/set aside the case to the file of assessing officer for de novo assessment. The ld. AR submits that he has a very limited prayer about issuance of notice under section 148 by juri iction assessing officer when assessment was completed in a faceless manner. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee was appraised about the fact that issue relating to issuance of notice under section 148 by juri ictional assessing officer (JAO) vis-à-vis by faceless assessing officer (FAO) is now pending before Hon’ble Supreme Court. Thus, it would not be appropriate by this bench to give any decision on such issue. After considering the position, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that matter pertained to A.Y. 2015-16 and the assessee is NRI, therefore, juri ictional assessing officer may be directed to complete the de novo assessment in a time frame manner and he undertakes on behalf of the assessee to make timely compliance to the notices of assessing officer. Mr. Rohit Ramesh Kapoor 3
On the other hand, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the Revenue after hearing the submission of assessee raised no objection for giving direction to the juri ictional assessing officer for completing assessment within one year. 4. We have considering the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. Considering the fact that ld CIT(A) has already restored back to the file of assessing officer. Therefore, no interference is called for at our end. However, we accept the submission of ld. AR of the assessee to complete the assessment order in a time frame manner. Hence, we direct the JAO to pass fresh assessment order as early as possible that to not later than one year from received of this order. In the result, grounds of appeal raised by assessee are partly allowed. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 05.08.2025 at the time of hearing. GIR OMKARESHWAR CHIDARAISH ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NT MEMBER
PAWAN SINGH
JUDICIAL MEMBER
MUMBAI, DATED: 05.08.2025
Biswajit
Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1)
The Assessee;
(2)
The Revenue;
(3)
The PCIT / CIT (Judicial);
(4)
The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5)
Guard file.
By Order