KRISHNA VENKAPPA SHETTY ,MUMBAI vs. JAO WARD 2(1), THANE

ITA 7256/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 March 2026AY 2019-20Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, noting that substantial justice should be preferred over technicalities. The Tribunal also decided to set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter for fresh adjudication, giving the assessee another opportunity to represent their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) for assessment year 2019-20. The NFAC had dismissed the appeal, partly due to the assessee being ex-parte. There was a delay of approximately 11 days in filing the appeal before the tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) after being ex-parte.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 69C,Section 148,Section 234A,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI

For Appellant: Shri Haresh Joshi
For Respondent: Shri Harendra Verma, Sr. DR
Hearing: 17.02.2026Pronounced: 12.03.2026

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 01.09.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2019-20. The following grounds are reproduced below:

“1. The Faceless Assessing Unit has erred in making addition of bogus purchase of Rs.39,37,500/- u/s 69C of the Act in gross violation of the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and rules made there under.

2

2.

The Juri ictional Assessing Officer has erred in ignoring principle laid down by Judgement Of Hexaware Technologies Limited High Court order passed by The Hon'ble K.R. Shriram & D

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →