STATE BANK OF INDIA- SEEPZ BRANCH,ANDHERI EAST vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), TDS CIRCLE 2(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2067/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2025AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 2067/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 State Bank of India Vs Additional Commissioner of SEEPZ BR Income Tax (Appeals), TDS Circle New Bank Building 2(2), Mumbai SEEPZ, Andheri (East) Mumbai - 400096 [TAN: MUMS38420E] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/ (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala, A/R Revenue by: Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R सुनवाई 1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the cause for treating the appeal as defective did not exist since the assessee had attached the requisite documents. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) on the grounds that Form 35 and other necessary documents were not filed. The assessee provided a screenshot showing that the documents were indeed attached.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal as defective without verifying the attached documents.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “G” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala, A/R
Hearing: 15/05/2025Pronounced: 20/05/2025

Assessee by : Shri Abdul Kadir Jawadwala, A/R Revenue by : Shri Bhangepatil Pushkaraj Ramesh, Sr. D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 15/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 20/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(A)’] dated 29/01/2025 pertaining to AY 2016-17.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in disposing the appeal is defective on the basis that Form 35, grounds of appeal, statement of facts, condonation of delay etc. are not filed by the assessee.

3.

At the very outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the screenshot of filing Form 35 along with screenshot of the documents attached. The screenshot of the documents attached is as under:-

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →