APNA GHAR UNIT NO. 4 CHS LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15 (1)(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 8044/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 August 2021AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessment order was ex-parte and the CIT(A) had not adjudicated the issues on merits. The Tribunal also noted the assessee's submission regarding the incorrect PAN used by the lower authorities.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment was completed ex-parte under Section 144 r.w.s. 147. The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer and CIT(A) failed to consider the return filed under the correct PAN, which was allotted as an Association of Persons, not a company. The CIT(A) did not deal with the issues on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower authorities erred by not considering the return filed under the correct PAN and failing to decide the appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC” MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI MANISH BORAD

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya, AR
For Respondent: Ms. Smita Verma, DR
Hearing: 10/08/2021Pronounced: 10/08/2021

ORDER PER MANISH BORAD, 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 2011-12 dated 31.10.2019 and arises out of assessment completed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act).

2.

At the outset, the Ld. AR for the assessee submitted that order of the Assessing Officer is ex-parte and Ld. CIT(A) also not dealt issue on merits. She also contended that assessee had filed the return under the correct PAN which has not been considered by both the lower authorities. The pray was made to Apna Ghar Unit No. 4 CHS Ltd. 2 set aside the issues raised in this file to Ld. Assessing Officer for a fresh adjudication and also considering the return filed under the correct PAN.

3.

Per contra, the Ld. DR could not controvert this fact that Ld. CIT(A) has not dealt the issue on merits.

4.

We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material on record. Though the assessee has raised multiple ground on mertis, we however observe that the assessment order framed by Ld. AO is ex-parte i.e. u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act. We also observe that when the assessee filed the appeal before the First Appellate Authority raising various grounds on merit, none was dealt on merit and Ld. CIT(A) passed the order applying judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the Multiplan India P. Ltd. 38 ITD 320 (1991) (Delhi).

5.

Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee was originally granted the PAN in the status of the company i.e. AAACA 8578 Q but since the assessee is association of person, new PAN was allotted i.e. AADAA 9738 R and the income earned by the assessee from rent and interest income were duly disclosed in the return filed under new PAN. However, both the lower authorities have not considered the return filed under new PAN. The Ld. AO has assessed in treating the assessee as a company. Prayer has been made for setting aside the issue to Ld. Assessing Officer for deciding afresh. Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) was fair enough to not oppose this request under the given facts.

6.

We, therefore, under the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice set aside all the issues raised in the instant appeal and direct Apna Ghar Unit No. 4 CHS Ltd. 3 ITA No. 8044/M/2019

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →