SURESH KUMAR PAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO WAD-22(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 723/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 March 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without dealing with the merits of the case, which is contrary to Section 250(6) of the Act. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order and restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order of the CIT(A) that dismissed their appeal against an assessment order. The dismissal was on the grounds of non-prosecution. The assessee had raised grounds related to an addition made under Section 56(2)(vi)(b) of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on grounds of non-prosecution without adjudicating the merits of the case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 56(2)(vi)(b),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, H(SMC

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "H(SMC)" BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Suresh Kumar Pal 574-2-6, New Ambewadi, Goli Bar Road, Khar (West), Mumbai – 400055. Maharashtra. [PAN:AGVPP4700F] …………. Appellant Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 22(3)(1) Mumbai Piramal Chamber, Mumbai. …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : None For the Respondent/Department : Shri Pravin Salunkhe Date Conclusion of hearing : 12.03.2026 Pronouncement of order : 13.03.2026

O R D E R

Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the Order, dated 17/10/2025, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’], whereby the Learned CIT(A) had dismissed appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 22/05/2023, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144 read with Section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], for the Assessment Year 2017- 2018.

2.

The Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1.0 On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT erred in making addition under section 56(2)(vi)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 amounting to Rs.27,57,665/- being Assessment Year 2017-2018 difference between value of purchase consideration and market value as income escaped assessed assessment.”

3.

We have heard the Learned Departmental Representative and have perused the material on record.

4.

Delay of 27 days marked by the registry in filing the present appeal is condoned after taking into consideration the explanation offered by the Assessee vide letter dated 27/01/2026. We note that the Learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal against Assessment Order for the Assessment Year 2017-2018 on the ground of non-prosecution. We find that while dismissing the appeal the Learned CIT(A) has not dealt with the averments made in the statement of facts and the grounds raised

by the Assessee in appeal before the Learned CIT(A). Irrespective of non-appearance of an Assessee before the Learned CIT(A), the Learned CIT(A) is required to deal with the issue raised by the Assessee on merits in view of the provisions contained in Section 250(6) of the Act. [CIT (Central) Nagpur vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF) (2017) 297 CTR 614 (Bombay) 25/04/2016]. Accordingly, we deemed it appropriate to set aside the ex-parte Order, dated 17/10/2025, and restore the grounds raised in appeal before the Learned CIT(A) for denovo adjudication before Learned CIT(A) as per law after granting the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Assessee is directed to be vigilant and track the appellate proceedings through Income Tax Business Application (ITBA) Portal. It is clarified that in case the Assessee fails to file submission and/or fails to enter appearance, the Learned CIT(A) would be at liberty to adjudicate to grounds raised in appeal on merits based upon materials on record. In terms of the aforesaid Ground No.1 raised by the Assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purposes without returning any finding on merits. Since we have set aside the impugned ex-parte order passed by Learned CIT(A), all the rights and contentions are left open.

2. Assessment Year 2017-2018

5.

In terms of the paragraph 4 above, appeal preferred by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →