YUNUS AHMED MANYAR ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 17(3)(5), MUMBAI
| आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ायपीठ, मुंबई |
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“G” BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT
&
SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A. No. 2854/Mum/2025
Assessment Year: 2011-12
Yunus Ahmed Manyar
1303, B wing
Minar Tower Co-op Housing Society
S.V. Road, Next to Excel Industries
Jogeshwari West
Mumbai - 400102
[PAN: BFUPM7361E]
Vs
ITO, 17(3)(5), Mumbai
अपीलाथ/ (Appellant)
यथ/ (Respondent)
Assessee by :
Shri Dhaval Shah & Tisha Bagh, A/Rs
Revenue by :
Shri Swapnil Choudhary, Sr. D/R
सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/06/2025
घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 19/06/2025
आदेश/O R D E R
PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dt.
25/04/2023 by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the ld. CIT(A)”]
pertaining to AY 2011-12. 2. The grievance of the assessee reads as under:-
“1. The CIT(A) has erred in upholding the assessment order by summarily disposing of the appeal without going into the merits of the claims made by the assessee.
The CIT(A) has erred in upholding the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, which is illegal, bad in law and in violation of principles of natural justice.
The CIT(A) has erred in confirming the assessment of capital gain at Rs. 1,05,06,590/- being gross sales proceeds of properties instead of long term capital gain offered to tax at Rs. 2,38,408/- after claiming exemption u/s. 54 of the Act.
I.T.A. No. 2854/Mum/2025
The CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the claim made u/s. 54 of the Act and not holding that the sale of properties resulted into a long-term capital gain to the assessee.
The appellant craves leave to add to, amend, alter or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal.”
A perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that the appeal has been dismissed in limine, though several notices were issued and served upon the assessee. 4. We are of the considered view that the ld. CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits of the case even if the assessee did not respond to the notices. 5. In the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the issues to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh on merits of the case after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 19th June, 2025 at Mumbai. (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Mumbai, Dated 19/06/2025
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
*SC SrPs
I.T.A. No. 2854/Mum/2025
आदेश की ितिलिप अेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to :
अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. थ / The Respondent 3. संबंिधतआयकरआयु! / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकरआयु! ) अपील ( / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 6. गाड% फाई/ Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER