RENISHA IMPEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NFAU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1576/MUM/2025Status: HeardITAT Mumbai05 May 2025AY 2016-2017Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1576/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Renisha Impex Private Limited 203, Swadeshi Mill Compound Vs Ground Floor 80/84, JSS Marg Central Plaza Cinema Girgaon Maharashtra - 400004 [PAN: AADCB1980G] अपीलार्थी/ (Appellant) Assessing Officer प्रत्यर्थी / (Respondent) Assessee by: None Revenue by : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing 05/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that even if the assessee was absent, the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on its merits. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits after providing an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was preferred against an order of the NFAC, Delhi, for AY 2016-17. The assessee did not appear for hearings despite notices. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without considering the merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without considering the merits, despite the assessee's absence, and whether the appeal should be restored for a decision on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE

Hearing: 05/05/2025Pronounced: 05/05/2025

Assessee by : None Revenue by : Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 05/05/2025 आदेश/O R D E R

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 06/01/2025 passed by the NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to AY 2016-17.

2.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of notice. We decided to proceed ex-parte. 3. We have carefully perused the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A). We find that though several opportunities were given by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee, yet the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine without going into the merits of the case.

I.T.A. No. 1576/Mum/2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →