RUSHABH PANKAJ SAVLA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CC, 5(2), MUMBAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“D” BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
& SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(Physical hearing)
Rushabh Pankaj Savla
322-323, SwastikDisa Corporate Park,
LBS Marg, Opp. Shreyas Cinema,
Ghatkopar West, Mumbai-400086. [PAN No. BZHPS0731D]

Vs
DCIT, CC-5(2),
KautilyaBhawan,BandraKurla
Complex, Bandra East,
Mumbai – 400051. Appellant / Assessee

Respondent / Revenue

Assessee by Sh. Chintan Shah CA
Revenue by Sh. Umashankar Prasad, CIT-DR
Date of hearing
25.06.2025
Date of pronouncement
25.06.2025

Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act

PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order ex-parte order of ld. CIT(A) dated 27.02.2025 for A.Y. 2022-23. 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have heard and record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that ld. CIT(A) has passed the order of ex-parte without adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merit. The assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A) on 02.06.2023. Notice of hearing of appeal was issued on 13.01.2025 for filing submission on or before 28.01.2025. The ld. CIT(A) issued back to back four notices to the assessee within one months. The last notice under section 250 was issued on 19.02.2025 for making submission by 25.02.2025. In response to such show cause notice, the assessee sought adjournment, however, the ld. CIT(A) instead considering the request of adjournment dismissed the appeal in ex- Rushabh Pankaj Savla 2

parte order. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee is really interested in pursuing his appeal on merit and he undertake on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant in future and making timely compliance. The assessee may be allowed one more opportunity to contest the case before ld.
CIT(A). The ld. AR also filed copy of screen shot of ITBA portal showing the request of adjournment in response to notice dated 19.02.2025. 3. On the other hand, learned Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue supported the order of ld. CIT(A). The ld. DR for the revenue submits that assessee was allowed more than reasonable opportunity as recorded in para 1 of the impugned order. The assessee has not made any compliance. The ld. CIT(A) passed the order on the basis of material available on record. The assessee does not deserve any further opportunity on any ground.
4. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities. We find that assessment order was completed under section 143(3) on 15.05.2023. The assessing officer while passing the assessment order made addition of Rs. 71.00 lacs on account of unaccounted income. Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal on 02.06.2023. The ld. CIT(A) fixed the hearing on various dates. The last date of hearing was fixed by notice dated 19.02.2025 to make compliance by 25.02.2025. In response to 19.02.2025, the assessee filed application for adjournment. However, neither the ld. CIT(A) recorded such request in his order nor allowed further adjournment and dismissed the appeal on the basis of material available on record. We find that ld. AR of the assessee has not Rushabh Pankaj Savla
3

explained the reason of non-compliance on 28.01.2025, 11.02.2025 and 19.02.2025. No doubt, the assessee made request of adjournment but only on 19.02.2025. In our view, substantial rights of assessee are involved in the present appeal. Therefore, assessee deserve one more opportunity to explain his fact before First Appellate Authority. At the same time, we find that approach of assessee was casual in not making compliance on three other occasions, therefore, the assessee is burden with the cost of 1,000/- to be deposited with Delhi High Court Legal Aid and Advice Committee/Board.
Original of the receipt be placed on the record of the file. With this direction, this appeal is restored back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating all the grounds of appeal afresh.
5. In the result, the appeal of assesseeis allowed for statistical purpose.
Order was pronounced in the open Court on 25/06/2025. PRABHASH SHANKAR
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PAWAN SINGH
JUDICIAL MEMBER

MUMBAI, Dated:/06/2025

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