SUNIL SURESH RANE,DOMBIVLI vs. ITO WARD 42(3)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 7729/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 March 2026AY 2016-17Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) could not have remitted the matter back to the AO, as the assessment order was not passed ex parte. The CIT(A) was statutorily required to consider the legal grounds raised by the assessee, which it failed to do.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an NRI, filed an appeal before the CIT(A) challenging an order passed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act. The CIT(A) condoned a delay of 264 days, accepted additional evidence, and remitted the matter back to the AO for verification. The assessee raised several grounds, including violation of natural justice and failure to adjudicate legal grounds.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in remitting the matter back to the AO without adjudicating the grounds on merits and violating principles of natural justice. Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated and adjudicated.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 144,Section 251,Section 144B,Section 148,Section 149(1)(b),Section 151,Section 271(1)(c),Section 271(1)(b),Section 271F,Section 234A,Section 234B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN & HON’BLE SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR

For Appellant: Shri Aakash Parekh (Virtually Present)
For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar (SR. DR)
Hearing: 12.02.2026Pronounced: 10.03.2026

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 29.09.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2016-17. The following grounds are reproduced below:

“1. Ground No. 1: Gross Violation of Principles of Natural Justice

2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in passing the appellate order u/s 250 of the Act dated 29-09-2025 without issuing a mandatory notice of hearing u/s 250 and without providing a

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →