RAJBHUSHAN OMPRAKASH DIXIT,MUMBAI vs. JT. COMMISSIONER (OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 941/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 July 2025AY 2012-2013Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (Accountant Member), SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN ( (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee's failure to respond was due to sufficient cause and not willful. Therefore, the CIT(A)'s order was set aside to allow for fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee submitted an affidavit explaining that non-compliance was due to criminal proceedings and absence of professional advice.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the assessee's explanation for non-compliance, and whether the reassessment was valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 153(2),Section 271(1)(c),Section 271(1)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “J (SMC

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN

For Appellant: Mr. Ameya Vaidya, Adv
For Respondent: Mr. Asif Karmali, Sr. DR
Pronounced: 10/07/2025

This appeal by the assessee is directed against order dated 17.12.2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – 48, Mumbai [in short ‘the Ld. CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2012-13, raising following grounds:

1.

That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 48,

Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit 2 Mumbai [Ld. CIT(A)] erred in Mumbai [Ld. CIT(A)] erred in upholding the addition of INR upholding the addition of INR [74,00,000] made by the Ld. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax [74,00,000] made by the Ld. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax [74,00,000] made by the Ld. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle 2(4), Mumbai [Ld. AO] under Section 143(3) (OSD), Central Circle 2(4), Mumbai [Ld. AO] under Section 143(3) (OSD), Central Circle 2(4), Mumbai [Ld. AO] under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ['Act'] without r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ['Act'] without r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ['Act'] without appreciating the factual matrix and judicial p appreciating the factual matrix and judicial precedents applicable recedents applicable in the instant matter. in the instant matter.

2.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in denying a final opportunity to the the Learned CIT(A) erred in denying a final opportunity to the the Learned CIT(A) erred in denying a final opportunity to the Appellant to present its case before the Appellate authority. Appellant to present its case before the Appellate authority. Appellant to present its case before the Appellate authority.

3. That on the facts an 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, d circumstances of the case, and in law, the Leamed CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that no fresh the Leamed CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that no fresh the Leamed CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that no fresh documents or information was available with the Ld. AO to documents or information was available with the Ld. AO to documents or information was available with the Ld. AO to reopen the assessment reopen the assessment and hence the reassessment based on and hence the reassessment based on merely change of opinion is not legally v merely change of opinion is not legally valid.

4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that the impugned CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that the impugned CIT(A) erred in ignoring the fact that the impugned assessment order is time barred as prescribed u/s 153(2) of the assessment order is time barred as prescribed u/s 153(2) of the assessment order is time barred as prescribed u/s 153(2) of the Act and consequently, the impugned assessment order is void ab Act and consequently, the impugned assessment order is void ab Act and consequently, the impugned assessment order is void ab initio.

5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the impugned the Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the impugned the Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the impugned assessment order is based on unsubstantiated diary entries of a assessment order is based on unsubstantiated diary entries of a assessment order is based on unsubstantiated diary entries of a third party and therefore the entire reassessment action third party and therefore the entire reassessment action third party and therefore the entire reassessment action by the Ld. AO is based upon the basis of dumb documents and hence Ld. AO is based upon the basis of dumb documents and hence Ld. AO is based upon the basis of dumb documents and hence invalid.

6.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 6. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the action of Ld. the Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the action of Ld. the Learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the action of Ld. AO in reassessment of Income of the Appellant on AO in reassessment of Income of the Appellant on the basis of the basis of entries of seized electronic data without any basis and based on entries of seized electronic data without any basis and based on entries of seized electronic data without any basis and based on 'doubt' which is also admitted by the Ld. AO. 'doubt' which is also admitted by the Ld. AO.

7.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 7. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO without appreciating that the reassessment should be based on hout appreciating that the reassessment should be based on hout appreciating that the reassessment should be based on concrete evidence linking the Appellant to the escaped income concrete evidence linking the Appellant to the escaped income concrete evidence linking the Appellant to the escaped income and not mere assumptions. and not mere assumptions.

8.

That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, 8. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Learned AO erred in initiating penalty pr the Learned AO erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) oceedings u/s 271(1) (c) and 271(1)(b) (c) and 271(1)(b) of the Act

Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit 3 ITA No. 941/MUM/2025

2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the assessee At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the assessee At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal ex-parte, submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal without considering the submissions of the assessee. It was thus without considering the submissions of the assessee. It was thus without considering the submissions of the assessee. It was thus prayed that the matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh that the matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh that the matter may be remanded to the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, in accordance with law. adjudication on merits, in accordance with law.

3.

We have heard the rival submissions advanced by both sides We have heard the rival submissions advanced by both sides We have heard the rival submissions advanced by both sides and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the and perused the material available on record. It is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had issued as many as nine notices to the assessee, ssued as many as nine notices to the assessee, ssued as many as nine notices to the assessee, which, according to the Ld. CIT(A), were not complied with. which, according to the Ld. CIT(A), were not complied with. which, according to the Ld. CIT(A), were not complied with. However, before us, the assessee has placed on record a duly sworn However, before us, the assessee has placed on record a duly sworn However, before us, the assessee has placed on record a duly sworn affidavit, explaining the reasons for such non affidavit, explaining the reasons for such non-compliance. compliance.

3.1 In the said affidav In the said affidavit, the assessee has averred that he was it, the assessee has averred that he was unable to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) due to his unable to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) due to his unable to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) due to his involvement in ongoing criminal proceedings initiated by the involvement in ongoing criminal proceedings initiated by the involvement in ongoing criminal proceedings initiated by the Directorate of Enforcement and the Serious Fraud Investigation Directorate of Enforcement and the Serious Fraud Investigation Directorate of Enforcement and the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) in relation to a company, in which he was a director. It ion to a company, in which he was a director. It ion to a company, in which he was a director. It is stated that these proceedings, being rigorously pursued by the is stated that these proceedings, being rigorously pursued by the is stated that these proceedings, being rigorously pursued by the investigating agencies, constrained his ability to engage with the investigating agencies, constrained his ability to engage with the investigating agencies, constrained his ability to engage with the appellate proceedings effectively. appellate proceedings effectively.

3.2 Further, the assessee has stated th Further, the assessee has stated that his long at his long-standing authorized representative, Mr. Hemant S. Hathi, a Chartered authorized representative, Mr. Hemant S. Hathi, a Chartered authorized representative, Mr. Hemant S. Hathi, a Chartered Accountant, has been suffering from Alzheimer's disease since Accountant, has been suffering from Alzheimer's disease since Accountant, has been suffering from Alzheimer's disease since 2018, which deprived the assessee of professional guidance during 2018, which deprived the assessee of professional guidance during 2018, which deprived the assessee of professional guidance during

Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit 4 the relevant period. It is also submitted that the relevant period. It is also submitted that adjournments were adjournments were sought by the newly appointed advocate on two occasions, which sought by the newly appointed advocate on two occasions, which sought by the newly appointed advocate on two occasions, which were not acceded to by the Ld. CIT(A). It is pointed out that the were not acceded to by the Ld. CIT(A). It is pointed out that the were not acceded to by the Ld. CIT(A). It is pointed out that the impugned order dated 17.12.2024 does not record any finding on impugned order dated 17.12.2024 does not record any finding on impugned order dated 17.12.2024 does not record any finding on whether such requests were considered or rejec whether such requests were considered or rejected. ted. The relevant part of the affidavit is reproduced as part of the affidavit is reproduced as under:

“13. I say that it is alleged by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax 13. I say that it is alleged by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax 13. I say that it is alleged by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax in his order dated 17.12.2024 that despite various notices being in his order dated 17.12.2024 that despite various notices being in his order dated 17.12.2024 that despite various notices being issued to file submission from 25.11.2019 to 10.12.2024, I issued to file submission from 25.11.2019 to 10.12.2024, I issued to file submission from 25.11.2019 to 10.12.2024, I have failed to respond to them and have merely sought adjournment. failed to respond to them and have merely sought adjournment. failed to respond to them and have merely sought adjournment.

14.

I say that the Directorate of Enforcement had registered an 14. I say that the Directorate of Enforcement had registered an 14. I say that the Directorate of Enforcement had registered an ECIR no. 32 of 2017 against Sterling Biotech Limited and its ECIR no. 32 of 2017 against Sterling Biotech Limited and its ECIR no. 32 of 2017 against Sterling Biotech Limited and its promoters and directors in 2018. I say that since the promoters promoters and directors in 2018. I say that since the promoters promoters and directors in 2018. I say that since the promoters of SBL are absconding, the said investigating agency is rigorously SBL are absconding, the said investigating agency is rigorously SBL are absconding, the said investigating agency is rigorously pursuing the matter by going after the directors. I say that due to pursuing the matter by going after the directors. I say that due to pursuing the matter by going after the directors. I say that due to the said proceedings before the Directorate of Enforcement, I was the said proceedings before the Directorate of Enforcement, I was the said proceedings before the Directorate of Enforcement, I was unable to respond particularly to notices issued on 25. unable to respond particularly to notices issued on 25. unable to respond particularly to notices issued on 25.11.2019 and 05.12.2019. and 05.12.2019.

15.

I say that the Serious Fraud Investigation Office ("SFIO") had 15. I say that the Serious Fraud Investigation Office ("SFIO") had 15. I say that the Serious Fraud Investigation Office ("SFIO") had filed a Complaint bearing SPL Case No. 517 of 2022 before the filed a Complaint bearing SPL Case No. 517 of 2022 before the filed a Complaint bearing SPL Case No. 517 of 2022 before the Hon'ble Sessions Court against Sterling Biotech Limited and its Hon'ble Sessions Court against Sterling Biotech Limited and its Hon'ble Sessions Court against Sterling Biotech Limited and its promoters and directors in 2022. I say promoters and directors in 2022. I say that since the promoters of that since the promoters of SBL are absconding, the said investigating agency is rigorously SBL are absconding, the said investigating agency is rigorously SBL are absconding, the said investigating agency is rigorously pursuing the matter by going after the directors. pursuing the matter by going after the directors.

16.

I say that the aforesaid Criminal Proceedings mentioned in 16. I say that the aforesaid Criminal Proceedings mentioned in 16. I say that the aforesaid Criminal Proceedings mentioned in Paragraph No. 14 & 15 are still going on against m Paragraph No. 14 & 15 are still going on against me and hence e and hence due to this reason I was not able to respond to notices seeking due to this reason I was not able to respond to notices seeking due to this reason I was not able to respond to notices seeking submissions issued by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, submissions issued by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, submissions issued by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai. CIT (A) 48, Mumbai.

17.

I say that my authorized representative, Mr. Hemant S. Hathi, 17. I say that my authorized representative, Mr. Hemant S. Hathi, 17. I say that my authorized representative, Mr. Hemant S. Hathi, CA has been suffering from Alzhe CA has been suffering from Alzheimer's disease since the year imer's disease since the year 2018. Mr. Hemant S. Hathi had been advising me and filing 2018. Mr. Hemant S. Hathi had been advising me and filing 2018. Mr. Hemant S. Hathi had been advising me and filing replies on my behalf to all the queries raised by the Department replies on my behalf to all the queries raised by the Department replies on my behalf to all the queries raised by the Department since 2013. However, due to his deteriorating health condition since 2013. However, due to his deteriorating health condition since 2013. However, due to his deteriorating health condition since 2018, he has been unable to respon since 2018, he has been unable to respond to the notices issued d to the notices issued by the Department. Consequently, I was bereft of his sound by the Department. Consequently, I was bereft of his sound by the Department. Consequently, I was bereft of his sound

Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit 5 professional advice and was unable to respond to the notices professional advice and was unable to respond to the notices professional advice and was unable to respond to the notices issued during this period issued during this period 18. I say that in response to your notice dated 13.11.2024, my 18. I say that in response to your notice dated 13.11.2024, my 18. I say that in response to your notice dated 13.11.2024, my current Advocate on Rec current Advocate on Record had vide letter dated 19.11.2024 ord had vide letter dated 19.11.2024 sought adjournment and permission to file Vakalatnama before the sought adjournment and permission to file Vakalatnama before the sought adjournment and permission to file Vakalatnama before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai. Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai. However, it is nowhere mentioned in the order dated 17.12.2024 However, it is nowhere mentioned in the order dated 17.12.2024 However, it is nowhere mentioned in the order dated 17.12.2024 whether the Ld. Commissioner of whether the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai had allowed or rejected the request of my advocate on Mumbai had allowed or rejected the request of my advocate on Mumbai had allowed or rejected the request of my advocate on record for adjournment. record for adjournment.

19.

I say that with regards to notices dated 15.03.2024, 19. I say that with regards to notices dated 15.03.2024, 19. I say that with regards to notices dated 15.03.2024, 24.07.2024, 12.09.2024 and 10.12.2024, I was unable to file 24.07.2024, 12.09.2024 and 10.12.2024, I was unable to file 24.07.2024, 12.09.2024 and 10.12.2024, I was unable to file submission as directe submission as directed in the said notices due to the Criminal d in the said notices due to the Criminal Proceedings going on against me as described in detail in the Proceedings going on against me as described in detail in the Proceedings going on against me as described in detail in the aforesaid paragraphs. paragraphs.

20.

I say that the said inability to respond effectively to the said 20. I say that the said inability to respond effectively to the said 20. I say that the said inability to respond effectively to the said notices was not deliberate and the same was due to the rigoro notices was not deliberate and the same was due to the rigoro notices was not deliberate and the same was due to the rigorous Criminal Proceedings conducted by various agencies against me Criminal Proceedings conducted by various agencies against me Criminal Proceedings conducted by various agencies against me and also due to the absence of professional advice which was not and also due to the absence of professional advice which was not and also due to the absence of professional advice which was not available to me in the absence of my authorized representative Mr. available to me in the absence of my authorized representative Mr. available to me in the absence of my authorized representative Mr. Hemant S. Hathi, CA who was suffering from Alzheimer diseas Hemant S. Hathi, CA who was suffering from Alzheimer diseas Hemant S. Hathi, CA who was suffering from Alzheimer disease.

21.

I say that I have tried diligently to pursue my Appeal before 21. I say that I have tried diligently to pursue my Appeal before 21. I say that I have tried diligently to pursue my Appeal before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai and hence this Hon'ble Tribunal should liberally consider the and hence this Hon'ble Tribunal should liberally consider the and hence this Hon'ble Tribunal should liberally consider the reasons due to which I was unable to effectively respond to th reasons due to which I was unable to effectively respond to th reasons due to which I was unable to effectively respond to the notices issued by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, notices issued by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, notices issued by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT (A) 48, Mumbai Mumbai.”

4.

The portion of the affidavit, reproduced The portion of the affidavit, reproduced above establishes that the failure to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) was the failure to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) was the failure to respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) was neither willful nor deliberate, but was occasioned by bona fide neither willful nor deliberate, but was occasioned by bona fide neither willful nor deliberate, but was occasioned by bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Importantly, the Importantly, the assertions made in the affidavit have no assertions made in the affidavit have not been controverted or t been controverted or rebutted by the Revenue. rebutted by the Revenue.

4.1 In view of the above and considering the principles of natural In view of the above and considering the principles of natural In view of the above and considering the principles of natural justice, we are of the opinion that the assessee was prevented by justice, we are of the opinion that the assessee was prevented by justice, we are of the opinion that the assessee was prevented by Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit Rajbhushan Omprakash Dixit 6 sufficient cause from participating in the appellate proceedings. We, sufficient cause from participating in the appellate proceedings. We, sufficient cause from participating in the appellate proceedings. We, therefore, find it just and appropriate to set aside the order passed therefore, find it just and appropriate to set aside the order passed therefore, find it just and appropriate to set aside the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and by the Ld. CIT(A) and remand the matter to him for remand the matter to him for de-novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the appeal afresh on adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the appeal afre adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) shall decide the appeal afre merits, after affording adequate and reasonable opportunity of merits, after affording adequate and reasonable opportunity of merits, after affording adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. being heard to the assessee.

4.2 Ordered accordingly. Ordered accordingly.

5.

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

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →