SHRI NARAYAN H. LADHA,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A)-41, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 931/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 January 2020AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) order was ex-parte and that the assessee was not given a proper hearing. The Departmental Representative agreed that the matter should be remanded back to the AO for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) without providing an opportunity to be heard and ignoring the material placed before him. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition based solely on the AO's findings.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without providing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and ignoring the material placed before him.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI

Hearing: 14.01.2020Pronounced: 14.01.2020

आदेश / O R D E R महावीर ससुंह, न्याययक सदस्य/ PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is arising out of the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-41, Mumbai in Appeal No. CIT(A)-41/IT-239/2013-14 dated 20.12.2017. The 2 | P a g e Nikunj Developers Assessment was framed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward- 24(1)(1), Mumbai (in short ITO / AO) for AY 2009-10 vide dated 19.12.2013, under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’).

2.

We have noticed from the grounds of appeal raised before us that the CIT(A) decided the issue ex-parte without providing the opportunity of being heard to the assessee and ignore the material placed before him. For this, assessee has raised the following ground: -

“1. The learned commissioner of income tax (Appeal) has erred in confusing the Assessment order without brining any material on record to revise the assessment order and ignoring the material place before him.”

3.

At the outset, it is noticed that none was present from assessee’s side and this appeal is decided ex-parte qua the assessee.

4.

We have noticed that the order of CIT(A) is ex-parte and even the CIT(A) confirmed the addition simply on the basis of AO’s finding. On query from the Bench, the learned Sr. Departmental Representative agreed that the matter can be remanded back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication on

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →