GEM CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 27(1), NAVI MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to represent their case, without prejudice to the merits of the dispute.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was filed challenging an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The assessee was ex-parte before the CIT(A) due to a reasonable cause, preventing effective representation.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing before the CIT(A) and if an opportunity for fresh representation should be granted.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI
Before: HON’BLE BR BASKARANHON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN
Date of Hearing 06.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement 10.03.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 20.11.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi / CIT(A), for the A.Y 2016- 17.
At the very outset, it is noticed that assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A), although Ld. AR tried to raising 2 Gem Corporation, Mumbai before the bench that there was ‘sufficient cause’ which prevented the assessee to represent properly before Ld. CIT(A). On the other hand DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities.
Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that there was reasonable cause, because of which assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Hence we are of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld.CIT(A). Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings.
Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law.
3 Gem Corporation, Mumbai
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026