DCIT - 10 (3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S PLATINUM ORGANICS LTD, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to give the assessee another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A).
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s order which restricted an addition on account of bogus purchases to 25% from the 100% made by the AO. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) for the appellate proceedings.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A) when the original appellate proceedings were ex-parte due to the assessee's non-appearance.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR
Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 28.03.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2009-10.
At the outset we would like to mention that neither assessee nor his authorized representative appeared to attend the hearing. Hence, after hearing the Ld. D.R. and going through the material available on records, we decide this appeal ex-parte.
2 M/s. Platinum Organics Ltd.
The only issue raised by the Revenue in various grounds of appeal is against the order of Ld. CIT(A) restricting the addition on account of bogus purchases to 25% of the bogus purchases as against the 100% addition made by the AO. At the outset, we observe that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order as the assessee has failed to attend the appellate proceedings despite various opportunities allowed by the Ld. CIT(A). Therefore we are of the view that the assessee deserves to be given one more opportunity to present his case before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly we send the appeal back to the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the same after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee which would meet the ends of justice.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 14.12.2020.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026