ZEELEN INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1)(4), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication. The assessee was directed to furnish all relevant documents and evidence without seeking unnecessary adjournments.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the NFAC, which confirmed the disallowance of F&O transaction losses and added commission income. The assessee had failed to furnish requisite details and supporting evidences before the Assessing Officer and the Ld. CIT(A), responding late to notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee had provided sufficient evidence for the claimed F&O losses and commission income, and whether the case should be remanded for de novo adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
Delay Condoned The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, vide order dated 08.08.2023 relevant to the Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC has grievously erred in confirming the disallowed loss of F & O transaction of Rs. 9,40,61,513/- in respect of claim of made in the return of income. Asst. Year : 2013-14 - 2– 2. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC has grievously erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 4,35,128/- being commission income. 3. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC and AO has grievously erred in not at all considering the submissions and evidences filed, and dismissed the appeal. 4. The appellant craves liberty to add, alter, and amend any ground of appeal
3. On perusal of the record, it is observed that notices under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were issued on 10.06.2019, 24.07.2019, 19.11.2019, 06.02.2020, 12.01.2021, 02.11.2022, 28.04.2023, 15.06.2023 and 15.11.2023 calling upon the assessee to furnish necessary details, clarifications, and explanations to substantiate the claim of loss from F&O transactions. However, despite issuance of several opportunities by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee responded only on 15.11.2022. The Ld. CIT(A), after examining the submission filed, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. It is further noted that the assessee had also failed to furnish requisite details and supporting evidences before the Assessing Officer during the assessment proceedings. Before us, the Learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee could not properly represent its case earlier due to certain difficulties and pleaded that, given an opportunity, due compliance will be and all relevant details, clarifications, and evidences would be duly submitted before the Revenue authorities. Considering the overall facts and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to furnish all relevant Asst. Year : 2013-14 - 3– bank statements, submissions, documents, and evidences before the Assessing Officer and to ensure due compliance with the notices issued, without seeking any unnecessary adjournments
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Saudamini Samantray vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Bhubaneswar IiOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Keshav Rice Mill, Ganjam vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, KatakaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Nanda Contruction PVT. LTD., Angul vs. Additional Commissioner, GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, SundergarhOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
