What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while acknowledging the Ld. DR's plea, set aside the impugned orders and restored the matters to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. This was done to grant the assessee another opportunity to be heard and substantiate their claims.

The assessee failed to appear before the ITAT, leading to ex-parte orders from the lower appellate authority. The appeals concerned additions made on account of suspicious purchases.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was provided with sufficient opportunity of hearing and whether the additions on account of suspicious purchases were justified.

M/S V N Exports vs ACIT | ITAT Mumbai 2021

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Ms. Usha Gaikwad-Ld. Sr. DR

For Respondent: Ms. Usha Gaikwad-Ld. Sr. DR

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No.1174/Mum/2020

I.T.A. No.1175/Mum/2020

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member): -

1. 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2011-12 & 2012-13 contest separate orders of learned first appellate authority.

2. At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee. Upon perusal of impugned order, it could be seen that the impugned orders are ex-parte orders since the assessee failed to appear during appellate proceedings despite being provided with sufficient opportunity of hearing. The Ld. DR pleaded for dismissal of the appeals. The sole issue involved in the appeals is addition on account of suspicious purchases.

3. Upon perusal of assessment orders, we find that Ld. AO made certain estimated additions on account of suspicious purchases. Upon further appeal, Ld. CIT(A) not only confirmed the addition, but also enhanced the same and disallowed entire purchases. Aggrieved the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4. Though, we concur with the submissions of Ld. DR, however, keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we deem it fit to grant another opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Accordingly, the impugned orders are set-aside and the matter, for both the years, are restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee, in turn, is directed to substantiate his stand failing which Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to re-adjudicate the matter on the basis of material on record.

5. Both the appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 07th September, 2021. (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) न्याययक सदस्य / Judicial Member लेखा सदस्य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; यदनांक Dated : 07/09/2021 Sr.PS, Dhananjay

M/S V N EXPORTS,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 19(3), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments