NIMESH P GANATRA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 29 (2)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7177/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 September 2021AY 2009-102 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the AO to decide the same on merit after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a reply before the Assessing Officer (AO), who passed an order based on available information. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also decided the issue in a cryptic manner.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO and CIT(A) provided a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee before passing their respective orders.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri Vijay H. Shah, A.R
For Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, D.R
Hearing: 24.08.2021Pronounced: 13.09.2021

Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 10.06.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2009-10.

2.

At the time of hearing it was brought to our notice that assessee could not file any reply before the AO and the AO passed the order on the basis of facts available before him. Similarly, before the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue in a cryptic manner. We are, therefore, inclined to restore the issue to the file of the AO to decide the same on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to co-operate in the assessment proceedings.

Order pronounced in the open court on 13.09.2021.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →