Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed a return of income, which was processed under Section 143(1) and later selected for scrutiny. The AO made an addition under Section 68. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A) but failed to comply with notices for hearing. Consequently, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.
Held
The Tribunal considered the rival submissions and the fact that the assessee did not comply with the notices issued by the CIT(A). However, in the interest of natural justice, the Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was afforded a proper opportunity of being heard before the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 143(1), 68, 1961
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
Shanker Mirchumal Jethani vs ITO Ward 23(3)(1),Mumbai 2N Pleasant Park, 24th Road, Room No.525A, 5th Floor, Piramal Bandra (West), Mumbai- Chambers, Mumbai 400050 PAN: AABPJ5256A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Namrata Chande (virtually present) Respondent by : Shri S. Anbuselvan (SRAR) Date of hearing : 09/03/2026 Date of pronouncement : 12/03/2026 O R D E R Per: Anikesh Banerjee (JM): The instant appeal of the assessee was preferred against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax appeal ADDL/JCIT (A)-1 Ahmedabad [for brevity the ‘Ld. CIT(A)’], order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961 (for brevity ‘the Act’) for assessment year 2011-12, date of order 15.10.2025. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee filed the return of income declaring a total income of Rs. 30,14,140/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny and the Ld. AO completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act by making an addition of Rs.40,12,000/- on account of unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act. Aggrieved by the said assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). However, during the appellate proceedings, the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). It is observed that the Ld. CIT(A) had issued notices fixing the appeal for hearing on six different occasions, but none of the notices were duly complied with by the assessee. Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal and upheld the order passed by the Ld. AO.
The Ld. AR submitted that the assessee was not afforded a proper and reasonable opportunity of being heard before the Ld. CIT(A). She therefore prayed that the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee with an adequate opportunity to present its case.
The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the revenue authorities and supported the findings of the Ld. CIT(A).
Shanker Mirchumal Jethani 5. We have considered the rival submissions and carefully examined the material placed on record. It is an admitted fact that the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Act with an addition of Rs. 40,12,000/- under section 68 of the Act. During the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) issued several notices and observed that sufficient opportunities had been granted to the assessee. The Ld. AR also fairly conceded that the assessee had not complied with the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). However, it is also noted that the assessee could not place the relevant evidences before the appellate authority. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the interest of natural justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law after considering the submissions and evidences that may be placed on record by the assessee. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, and all the issues are kept open for fresh consideration by the Ld. CIT(A). Needless to state, the assessee shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard during the set-aside proceedings, and any evidence sought to be filed shall be considered in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to remain diligent and extend full cooperation so as to facilitate the expeditious disposal of the matter.