ZENAL JAINAM DEVELOPERS,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- CIRCLE 32(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal in limine without verifying the facts. Therefore, to ensure justice and fairplay, the Tribunal restored the issue to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration with a direction to examine documentary evidence and afford the assessee an adequate opportunity of being heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals were against orders from the CIT(A) concerning AY 2012-23. ITA No. 4358/Mum/2017 was against a quantum addition of Rs. 30,00,000/- made by the AO under Section 68. The assessee argued that the advance giving rise to the addition was from FY 2007-08 and thus not taxable in the current year.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal in limine without considering the merits, and whether the impugned advance pertained to the assessment year under consideration.
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 SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Zenal Jainam Developers Asstt. Commissioner of Income tax, Circle-32(1), Mumbai Shop No. 6, Saurabh Apartments Vs Shahaji Raje Road, Nr. Bhuta Ville Parle (East) Mumbai - 400057 [PAN: AAAAD2573N] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Shalin Divatia, C.A. Revenue by : Shri Pushkaraj Bhangepatil, Sr. D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 05/02/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 05/02/2025 आदेश/O R D E R
PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM:
The captioned appeals by the assesse are preferred against two separate orders of the ld. CIT(A)-37, Mumbai & NFAC Delhi, [hereinafter ‘the ld. CIT(A)’], dated 22/03/2017 and 09/09/2024 respectively, pertaining to AY 2012-23. 2. is the appeal against the quantum addition of Rs.30,00,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the Act.
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026