PAWANKUMAR FAKIRCHAND GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEAL, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 919/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 April 2025AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits, after giving the assessee an opportunity to be heard. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed its return of income for AY 2020-21. The AO disallowed a claim of Rs. 22,50,000/- for excise duty paid against interest income. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance. The assessee appealed to the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether excise duty paid against interest income is an allowable expenditure. Whether the assessee was given a proper opportunity to substantiate the claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(2),Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL & SMT. RENU JAUHRI

For Respondent: Shri V. K. Chaturvedi
Hearing: 29.04.2025Pronounced: 30.04.2025

सुिवधई की िधरीख / Date of Hearing 29.04.2025 घोर्णध की िधरीख/Date of Pronouncement 30.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Mumbai/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 13.12.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2020-21.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

A.Y. 2020-21 Pawankmar Fakirchand Gupta “1.1 We have been today newly appointed by the abovenamed assessee appellant to represent the above mentioned Income Tax Appeal filed by him for the above assessment year and as to prepare and compile the paper-book to be filed in the above appeal on receipt of relevant folders & files from his erstwhile tax representative we need time of at least two weeks therefore, in the above circumstance earnestly request your honours to kindly adjourn the hearing fixed in the matter on 19/03/2025 and may re-fix the same after 15 days on any day convenient to the hon'ble Bench, except on 24th, 25th & 26nd March, 2025 and 16th & 17 April, 2025 on which dates the undersign has to attend the hearings already fixed before different Benches of Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the month of March & April, 2025. 1.2 Letter of authority in original executed by assessee appellant in our favour on stamp paper of Rs.500/- to represent the matter is enclosed herewith.”

3.

The assessee filed its return of income declaring Rs. 1,94,40,450. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny, and a notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 29.06.2021. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the assessee had claimed Rs. 22,50,000/- as excise duty paid against interest income from partnership firms. The AO disallowed this claim of Rs. 22,50,000/-, holding it to be not an allowable expenditure. Accordingly, the assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, determining the total income at Rs. 2,16,90,960/-.

4.

Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who upheld the addition after noting that the assessee had failed to substantiate his claim. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available before us. In the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter A.Y. 2020-21 Pawankmar Fakirchand Gupta to Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.04.2025.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →