DILIPKUMAR CHIMANLAL & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ITO 19 (1)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6934/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 December 2019AY 2008-094 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The assessee was to be given a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a diamond import/export firm, was found to have obtained accommodation entries from hawala parties. The Assessing Officer estimated GP at 8% on alleged bogus purchases and made an addition. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order dismissing the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's adjournment request and whether the assessee was denied a fair hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY

For Appellant: Shri Killi Krishna Murty, AR
For Respondent: Shri R.Bhoopathi, DR

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A), Mumbai 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT, Mumbai 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स�या�पत ��त //True Copy//

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →