AMSONS STEEL PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5895/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 February 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)3 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 admitted the additional evidence filed by the assessee. In the interest of natural justice, the assessee was granted another opportunity to present their case before the AO. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) was set aside, and the issues were restored to the AO for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged an order by the Ld. CIT(A) concerning AY 2018-19. The AO made additions by disallowing expenses and on account of differences in Form-26AS. The assessee claimed they were not provided a video conference hearing and that additional evidence was available.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO correctly made additions without proper opportunity for hearing and consideration of evidence. Whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity with admission of additional evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 26AS,Section 147,Section 148,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “A” BENCH : MUMBAI

Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

Assessment Year : 2018-19 Amsons Steel Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, Plot No. A/16, National E-Assessment Centre Wagle Industrial Estate, vs. Road No.8, Thane, Maharashtra PAN : AAACA4716G (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Dr. K. Shivaram & Shri Shashi Bekal For Revenue : Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11-02-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 11-02-2025 O R D E R PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M : The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dt.20-09-2024 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟] and it relates to AY. 2018-19.

2.

The Ld.AR appearing for the assessee submitted that the AO has made certain additions by disallowing the expenses claimed by the assessee and also making addition on the basis of difference in Form- 26AS. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee had asked for hearing by video conference, but the same was not provided by the AO. Further, certain additions have been made by the AO, without confronting the assessee. The Ld.AR also submitted that the assessee is having all the details relating to the additions made by the AO and they are being filed as additional evidences before the ITAT. He submitted that, if the additional evidences are properly considered, then there would not be any occasion to make these additions. Accordingly, the Ld.AR prayed that these additional evidences may kindly be admitted and the entire issues may be restored to the file of the AO for examining the same afresh.

3.

We heard the Ld.DR and perused the record. Having regard to the submissions made by the Ld.AR, we are of the view that, in interest of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the AO. We also admit the additional evidences furnished by the assessee and they also require examination at the end of the AO. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file of the AO for examining them afresh. We also direct the assessee to fully co- operate with the AO for expeditious completion of the assessment. After providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee, the AO may take appropriate decision in accordance with law on the impugned additions.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 26AS

All 50 judgments and leading authorities on Section 26AS →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →