MUKESH VASANTKUMAR CHANDAN,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3003/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 February 2026AY 2014-201515 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding the assessee's explanation to be plausible and supported by affidavit. Regarding the merits, the Tribunal held that making an addition under section 43CA when income was already computed under the presumptive scheme of section 44AD, with the turnover already reflecting the stamp duty value, amounted to duplication and an impermissible hybrid computation.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed with a significant delay of 591 days, attributed to reasons beyond the assessee's control, including lack of knowledge of the CIT(A)'s ex-parte order and health issues. The Assessing Officer had made additions under sections 41(1), estimated income, and 43CA, of which the CIT(A) deleted the first two but confirmed the addition under section 43CA.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal is condonable? Whether an addition under section 43CA can be made when the assessee is opting for presumptive taxation under section 44AD and the turnover is already considered at stamp duty value?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250,Section 41(1),Section 43CA,Section 44AD,Section 253(5)

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, D BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR

For Appellant: Shri Viraj Mehta, Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. DR
Hearing: 24.02.2026Pronounced: 26.02.2026

PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.11.2021 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as "CIT(A)"] under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]for the Assessment Year 2014-15, arising out of the assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 20(2)(1), Mumbai[hereinafter referred to as "Assessing Officer"] under section 143(3) of the Act dated 30.12.2016. 2. The assessee had earlier filed appeal before the Co-ordinate Bench,

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 41(1)

All 1,943 judgments and leading authorities on Section 41(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →