Loading judgment…
Facts
The Assessee appealed against an order of the Ld. Commissioner which affirmed an addition of Rs. 48,30,000/- made by the AO. Despite multiple notices, the Assessee failed to provide a reply or documents, leading to the dismissal of their first appeal.
Held
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision. This was subject to the Assessee depositing Rs. 11,000/- and providing the receipt, and cooperating with future notices and document submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the Assessee's failure to provide timely submissions warrants a remand for a fresh adjudication by the lower authority, subject to conditions.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 254
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR
Mr. Nemchand J Gala DCIT-4(3)(1) 93 Dadi Sheth, Agiary Lane, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400002. Mumbai – 400020. PAN: AACPG1554D (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Hari S.Raheja, Ld. A.R. Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Ld. D.R. Date of Hearing : 17.04.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 26.05.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member: These appeals have been preferred by the Assessee against the order even dated 30.11.2024, impugned herein, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11.
The issues involved in both the appeals are identical and therefore for the sake of brevity the same were heard together and are being disposed of by this composite order and considering as a lead case and result of the same shall apply mutatis mutandis to both the appeals under consideration.
In the instant case, vide assessment order dated 17.12.2019 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act an addition of Rs.48,30,000/- was made by the Assessing Officer (AO).
The Assessee, being aggrieved, though challenged the said addition by filing first appeal before the Ld. Commissioner, however, in spite of sending six notices in all for the dates of hearing, the Assessee eventually made no reply and therefore in the constrained circumstances and facts in totality, the Ld. Commissioner affirmed the aforesaid addition by dismissing the appeal of the Assessee.
Thus, the Assessee, being aggrieved, is in appeal before this Court and at the outset had submitted that may be by putting any condition one more opportunity may be given to the Assessee to represent his case.
On the contrary, the Ld. D.R. refuted the claim of the Assessee.
We have heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Admittedly, in the instant case, specifically in the absence of relevant reply/documents, which the Assessee failed to file, the issue involved remained adjudicated in its right perspective or proper manner and therefore considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality and the conduct of the Assessee, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order and consequently remanding the case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to deposit of Rs.11,000/- under “other heads” in the Revenue Department and to produce copy of the receipt before the Ld. Commissioner, as agreed to by the Assessee.
The Assessee is also directed to comply with the notices to be issued and file the relevant reply/documents, which would be essentially required by the Ld. Commissioner for proper adjudication of the issue(s) involved.
Thus, the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner accordingly. is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, both the appeals under consideration are allowed for statistical purposes, in the same terms.
Order pronounced in the open court on 26.05.2025.