M/S. MAHAK CREATION PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the assessee had not submitted details to the lower authorities, and the CIT(A) had confirmed the addition. However, granting an opportunity to the assessee, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for de-novo assessment.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) which confirmed the addition of Rs. 48,19,870/- for undisclosed transactions and also confirmed interest and penalty. The assessee failed to provide details to the lower authorities.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in passing an ex-parte order and confirming additions without deciding on merits, and whether the matter should be remanded for de-novo assessment.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 234A,Section 234B,Section 234C,Section 234D,Section 271AAC,Section 250
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT Ms SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Mahak Creation Private Income Tax Officer, Vs. Limited, Ward-2(1)(1), Mittal House, Ahmedabad. Atira Road, Ambawadi, Ahmedabad-380015. [PAN :AAECM7657 E] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Mohit Balani, AR Respondent by: Shri Suresh Chand Meena, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 03.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 09.07.2025 O R D E R PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-
This appeal is filed by the Assessee against the appellate order dated 16.12.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, relating to the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:
1. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in passing the impugned order, ex-parte without deciding the merits 2. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in confirming the action of Ld.AO in making an addition of Rs.48,19,870/- as undisclosed transaction on account of alleged accommodation entries from various concerns. M/s. Mahak Creation Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2018-19 - 2– 3. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in confirming the action of AO in charging interest u/s.234 A/B/C/D. 4. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts in confirming the action of AO in initiating penalty u/s.271AAC of the Act which is wholly unsustainable in law and on facts of the case.
3. On going through the record, we find that the notices u/s.250 were issued on 02.05.2023, 14.10.2024, 29.10.2024 & 11.11.2024, requesting the assessee to submit certain details/clarification/ explanation regarding undisclosed transaction. However, in pursuance to the same the assessee failed to submit any reply and the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice the matter is remanded to the Ld.CIT(A) for conducting assessment de-novo. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Ld.CIT(A) and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.
More judgments on Section 234A
- Vikas Ashokkumar Masand, Ahmedabad vs The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3130/AHD/2026[A.Y. 2017-18]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026
- Sarvjeet Singh Through Legal Heir Manjit… vs ITO Ward 1(1), AlwarITA 355/JPR/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 2128/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Cornerstone Ondemand International Limited… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 4558/MUM/2023[2021-22]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Utkal Suppliers,Ganjam vs. Assistant Commissioner Of CT And GST, Ganjam-I Circle,GanjamOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of Hte Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Kotdwar Steel Limited vs. Office Of The Deputy CommissionerUttarakhand · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026