MANDALIA OVERSEAS CORPORATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO 17 (2)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1572/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 October 2021AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was not a speaking order, failing to adjudicate the issues properly. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal arose from an order of the CIT(A) which dismissed grounds related to disallowance of losses and reopening of assessment. The assessee argued that the CIT(A)'s order was non-speaking and lacked proper adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a speaking order adjudicating the issues raised by the assessee. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 148 was valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SRI MAHAVIR SINGH

For Appellant: Shri Sumit Sheth, AR
Pronounced: 27.10.2021

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “SMC” �यायपीठ मुंबई म�। आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण �यायपीठ मुंबई म�। आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण �यायपीठ मुंबई म�। �यायपीठ मुंबई म�। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI �ी महावीर �सह, उपा�य� के सम� । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT Aayakr ApIla saM Aayakr ApIla saM./ Aayakr ApIla saM Aayakr ApIla saM (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Mandalia Overseas Corporation The Income Tax Officer- 4th Floor, 212/216 Rang Mahal, 17(2)(3) Room No.123B, Aaykar Bhawan 5/7 Samuel Street, Masjid Bunder Vs. M.K.Road, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 003 (ApIlaaqaI ApIlaaqaI ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) ApIlaaqaI (p`%yaqaaI p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) p`%yaqaaI p`%yaqaaI .. �थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. AAAFM1863F अपीलाथ� क� ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Sumit Sheth, AR ��यथ� क� ओर से / Respondent by : Shri Vivek Perampurna, DR 27.10.2021 सुनवाई क� तारीख / Date of hearing: घोषणा क� तारीख / Date of pronouncement : 27.10.2021 AadoSa AadoSa / O R D E R AadoSa AadoSa महावीर �सह, उपा�य� के �ारा / PER MAHAVIR SINGH, VP:

This appeal of the assessee is arising out of order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)]-57, Mumbai [in short CIT(A)], in appeal No. CIT(A)-57/Arr508/2018-19 vide dated 28.01.2019. The Assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-17(2)(3) Mumbai (in short ITO/ AO) for the A.Y. 2010-11 vide order dated 28.12.2016 under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee took me through the order of Ld.CIT(A) read out the findings of Ld.CIT(A) which is given in para 7 of on merits which reads as under:-

“ 7. During the course of assessment of the Appellant asked AO to give proof or any other evidence in regards to its involvement in Mandalia Overseas Cor poration AY 10-11 Client Code Modified by the broker vide letter dt. 27.12.2016. Copy of the same is attached as given any evidence in this regards and made addition of Rs. 9,01,680/- based on information received from Pr.DIT(Inv.) Ahmedabad.” The SEBI’s guidelines. In the light of the above discussion I find that Assessing Officer has rightly disallowed the losses claim by the assessee. Hence, ground NO. 1 to 3 is dismissed.”

3.

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee also drew my attention to the decision of ground No. 4 to 6, which is jurisdictional issue and the relevant decision reads as under:-

“The appellant vide ground NO.4 to 6 has raised the issue of notice u/s. 148 as bad n law. The appellants submission which an incorporated in above paras have been perused by me. I find that the Assessing Officer has rightly reopened the case u/s.

148.

From the perusal of reasons recorded it is been that the assessing officer received the information from the officer of Pr.DIT Investigation Ahemedabad. On the basis of information the Assessing officer formed an opinion and the Assessing Officer with due application of mind had reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Hence in my onion the action of the Assessing Officer cannot be faulted. Hence the grounds raised

by appellant is dismissed.”

4. The Ld. Counsel stated that the order of Ld.CIT(A) is totally non speaking and no discussion at all in the order despite the fact that the complete details were filed before Ld.CIT(A). When these facts were confronted to Ld. Sr.DR, he could not controvert the above. Even now before me, Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed copy of submissions filed before Ld.CIT(A) and also the details in regard to additions as well as reopening, but since the Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issues by a speaking order , I cannot gather the evidences. In such a situation, I have no option to except to set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and remand the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication for passing a speaking order. Hence, the matter is remanded back to the file of the Ld.CIT(A), who will pass order after allowing reasonable opportunities of being heard to the assessee and by passing a speaking order.

Mandalia Overseas Cor poration AY 10-11 5. In the Result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 27.10.2021.

More judgments on Section 148

All 35,022 judgments and leading authorities on Section 148 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →