M/S. LEO MOTORS PVT LTD., ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), , BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee should have been provided a reasonable opportunity of being heard. In the interest of justice, the issue is remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration and decision.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against an NFAC order confirming an addition of Rs. 2,03,24,288/- under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act for AY 2013-14. The AO had disallowed share application money pending allotment. The NFAC passed a cryptic order without providing sufficient reasons or adequate opportunity to the assessee.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC order was passed without providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee? Whether the addition made by the AO under Section 68 was justified?
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHUANDSHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K
Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the Order passed by the NFAC under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act'),vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064245960(1) dated 27.08.2024, for the Assessment Year 2013-14, confirming the addition made by AO under section 68 of the Act of Rs.2,03,24,288/-. The AO passed Order on 17.12.2018 under section 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act disallowing the share application money pending for allotment of Rs.2,03,24,288/- under section 68 of the Act against which the assessee filed appeal before the NFAC on Page 2 of 3 18.01.2019. As per grounds of appeal, we noted that the NFAC provided last opportunity on 25.01.2021 during covid-19 pandemic period. On 28.07.2021 assessee sought for adjournment thereafter the NFAC did not issue any further notice to the assessee and passed a cryptic order on 22.04.2024, there is no sufficient reasons for dismissing the appeal of the assessee. From the records produced before us, there is no information about any notices issued after 2021 to before passing of the Order under section 250 of the Act.
We have heard both the parties and on going through the facts of the case and Order of lower authorities, we noted that the assessee should have been provided reasonable opportunity of being heard before passing Order under section 250 of the Act. Therefore, considering the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we are remitting this issue back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration and decision as per law. Assessee is directed to submit necessary documents to the Revenue in support of its claim for speedy disposal of the case.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Pronounced in the court on the date mentioned on the caption page.
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 →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026