APRICOT CAPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO 9(1)(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2288/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 October 2019AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had granted multiple opportunities, but the assessee failed to appear. To ensure natural justice, the appeal was remanded to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance, confirming an addition of Rs. 2,88,31,317/- under Section 68. The assessee sought one last opportunity for adjudication on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex parte order without proper adjudication, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present its case on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A”, BENCH

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM

For Appellant: Shri Tanay Nuwal
For Respondent: Ms. Samatha Mullamudi
Hearing: 26/09/2019Pronounced: 04/10/2019

आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in A.Y.2012-13 arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-16/IT-342/ITO-9(1)(3)/2015-16 dated 17/01/2018 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 30/03/2015 by the ld. Income Tax Officer – 9(1)(3), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO).

2.

We find that the assessee has raised a preliminary ground on violation of principles of natural justice as the ld. CIT(A) had passed an order ex parte while disposing off the appeal.

3.

We find that the ld. CIT(A) had granted several opportunities to the assessee but despite that none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the addition made by the ld. AO in respect of unexplained cash credit u/s.68 of the Act in the sum of Rs.2,88,31,317/-. Before us, the ld. AR prayed for one last opportunity for adjudication of the issue before the ld. CIT(A) on merits. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it fit and appropriate, in the interest of natural justice and fair play, to remand this appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for denovo adjudication on merits in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed not to take any adjournment before the ld. CIT(A) except due to exceptional or bonafide circumstances. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 04/10/2019

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →