M/S SUPREME INFRASTRUCTURE BOT PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(3)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1368/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 November 2021AY 2013-142 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without dealing with the merits of the case. For the sake of justice, the Tribunal decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) but failed to comply with multiple notices and sought several adjournments. Consequently, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits. Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN & SHRI RAVISH SOOD

For Appellant: Mr. Gaurav Kabra, AR
For Respondent: Mr. B.K. Bagchi, DR
Hearing: 12/10/2021Pronounced: 30/11/2021

ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai [in short ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2013-14 dated 22.11.2019 and arises out of assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

2.

At the time of hearing, it is observed that assessee has filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-24, Mumbai on 19.11.2019. However, the assessee has not complied to various notices issued by the office of the Ld. CIT(A) on various dates which is listed at page 5 of the appellate order.

M/s Supreme Infrastructure BOT Pvt. Ltd. 2

3.

Since the assessee has not responded to the various notices and taken several adjournments. Due to non-compliance of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by applying various case law on non- prosecution by the assessee.

4.

Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal due to non-prosecution of the assessee and not dealt with the issue on merits. Therefore, for the sake of justice we deem it fit to remit the issue back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to give one more opportunity to the assessee and adjudicate the issue on merits. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →