NANDAN EQUIPMENT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 10(3)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5079/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 January 2025AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER | ITA No. | A.Y. | Appellant | Respondent | |---------------|----------|------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------| | 5079/Mum/2024 | 2014-15 | Nandan Equipment Services Private Limited, | ACIT-10(3)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai | | | | C-15, Nanddham Industrial Estate, Marol Maroshi | | | | | Road, Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai PAN: AAE3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that in the interest of natural justice, the assessee should be given one more opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was set aside and the issues were restored for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

Two appeals were filed relating to the same assessment year. One appeal (ITA No. 5079/M/2024) was found to be a duplicate and was dismissed. The other appeal (ITA No. 5052/M/2024) was against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for assessment year 2014-15.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A) in light of an ex-parte order and duplicate appeal filing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

These two appeals relate to the same assessment year. The Ld A.R submitted that the registry of ITAT has registered the same appeal filed electronically and again manually twice. Accordingly, the is duplicate appeal and the same is dismissed.

2.

We shall take up the other appeal No. ITA 5052/M/2024. It is directed against the ex-parte order dated 31-07-2024 passed by Ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and it relates to the assessment year 2014-15. The Ld A.R submitted that the notices were sent by Ld CIT(A) online and the & 5052/Mum/2024 same has escaped the attention of the assessee. Accordingly, she prayed that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity.

3.

We heard Ld D.R. Having regard to the submissions made by Ld A.R, we are of the view that, in the interest of natural justice, the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the Ld CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with Ld CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of the appeal.

4.

In the result, the appeal No.5052/M/2024 is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. The appeal No.5079/M/2024 is dismissed as infructuous, being duplicate appeal.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →