Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE - JM:
The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -20, Mumbai, passed u/s. 143(3) and 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Aspee Distributors Assn., Mumbai. - 2 - 2.At the time of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment petition was filed. We heard the submissions of the Ld.DR and considered the material on record. On perusal of the order of the LdCIT(A), we find that the assessee has raised the grounds of appeal in respect of claim u/s 44A of the Income Tax Act but the CIT(A) has confirmed the disallowance of claim and sustained the addition.
We heard the Ld. DR and perused the material on record. We considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the order of the LdCIT(A), find that the assessee could not substantiate its case with the evidences and the claim was not made in the return of income filed. Therefore to meet the ends of the justice, we provide one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee to substantiate its claim before the assessing officer with evidences. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the LdCIT(A) and restore the entire disputed issues to the file of Assessing officer to adjudicate afresh and allow the grounds of appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes.
Aspee Distributors Assn., Mumbai. - 3 - 4. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17.12.2020