BHUMI POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(1), RAJKOT

ITA 755/RJT/2025Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 March 2026AY 2023-244 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee had not exercised due care and attention in responding to notices issued by the CIT(A) and had been negligent in pursuing the case. The Tribunal noted the non-cooperative attitude of the appellant in pursuing the case before the CIT(A). In the interest of justice, the Tribunal granted the assessee an opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the order of the lower authorities and remitted the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits after providing the assessee with a due opportunity of being heard. The assessee was directed to deposit a cost of Rs. 1000/- with the Prime Minister Relief Fund within 10 days. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Bhumi Ploymers Private Limited, filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Rajkot Bench, against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) [CIT(A)], NFAC, Delhi. The CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal, upholding the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2023-24. The AO had assessed the total income at Rs. 4,95,07,604/-, an increase from the returned income of Rs. 3,08,27,380/-. The disputed additions included disallowance of purchases, commission payments, interest on borrowings, discount and miscellaneous expenses, and rent for non-deduction of TDS. The assessee sought a fresh opportunity to present its case before the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the disallowance of purchases amounting to Rs. 31,67,088/- made by the AO under section 37(1) of the Act, on the ground that the suppliers had not filed their income tax returns, is justified? (Question of law and fact) 2. Whether the disallowance of purchases amounting to Rs. 1,02,58,562/- made by the AO under section 37(1) of the Act, on the ground that the suppliers had not filed their income tax returns, is justified? (Question of law and fact) 3. Whether the disallowance of interest paid on borrowings amounting to Rs. 50,64,794/- made by the AO under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act for want of verification is justified? (Question of law and fact) 4. Whether the disallowance of discount expenses and miscellaneous expenses amounting to Rs. 16,48,578/- made by the AO under section 37(1) of the Act for want of verification is justified? (Question of law and fact) 5. Whether the disallowance of rent amounting to Rs. 1,89,780/- made by the AO under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for failure to deduct tax at source is justified? (Question of law and fact) Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that the disallowances made by the AO were unjustified and made in disregard of the facts and submissions. The assessee requested one more opportunity to represent its case before the lower authority. Revenue's contention: The revenue argued that the assessee was negligent in pursuing the case before the lower authorities and requested that a cost be imposed on the assessee. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 144B,Section 37(1),Section 36(1)(iii),Section 40(a)(ia),Section 270A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Before: DR. ARJUN LAL SAINI & DR. DINESH MOHAN SINHA

Per, Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha, JM: Captioned appeal filed by the assessee, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2023-24, is directed against the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short “the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC"], dated 13.10.2025, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short ‘the AO”) u/s 143(3) r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), vide order dated 22.03.2025. 2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assesse, are as follows:

“1. Th

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 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →