TRANSFORMING STRUCTURES CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) -22, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 588/MUM/2021Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 January 2022AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the impugned order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice as the assessee was not given an adequate opportunity of being heard. Therefore, the order was set aside and the matter was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A). The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the appeal was heard ex-parte. The ITAT noted that the National Faceless Centre did not provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of disallowance under Section 14A and whether the ex-parte order violated the principles of natural justice.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

For Respondent: Ms. Bhoomika Patel (DR)
Hearing: 30/11/2021Pronounced: 05/01/2022

O R D E R

PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM

1.

This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 01.04.2021 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (the Ld. First Appellate Authority), raising following grounds: “

1. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 7,53,000/- made in the assessment order by addition of disallowance expenditure u/s 14A as there is no expenses for earning exempt income during the year, without appreciating complete facts and circumstances of the case.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in passing an exparte order without giving sufficient opportunity to present the case. As the 2 Assessment Year: 2013-14 principle of natural justice are grossly violated, order passed confirming the additions made, may be quashed.”

2.

At the outset, we may like to mention that despite notifying, neither anyone appeared on behalf of the assessee for representing in hearing nor any application seeking adjournment was filed. In the circumstance, the appeal was heard ex-parte qua the assessee after hearing arguments of the Ld. Departmental Representative.

3.

We have heard submissions of the Ld. Departmental Representative. We find that this appeal has been heard by the ‘National Faceless Centre’ without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. On perusal of the impugned order, we find no mention of any opportunity even for filing of written submission has been allowed to the assessee. In the circumstances, the impugned order being in violation of principle of natural justice, we feel it appropriate to set aside the impugned order and restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. First Appellate Authority having jurisdiction over the case for deciding afresh after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 4. In the result, the Ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Other grounds are not required to be adjudicated adjudicated, as the appeal has been restored back to the Ld. First Appellate Authority. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

3 Assessment Year: 2013-14

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →