DEEPAK MULCHAND GOSAR,MUMBAI vs. WARD 41(2)(1), MUMBAI

When the appeal was taken up for hearing Learned Authorized Representative submitted that the appeal preferred by the Assessee against the Intimation Order passed under Section 143(1) of the Act was dismissed by the Learned CIT(A) recording that ‘the Assessee has Assessment Year 2017-2018 failed to submit any substantial evidence to back the appeal against additions made by the Assessing Officer’. The Learned Authorized Representative for the Assessee placed reliance upon the submissions filed before the Learned CIT(A) on 20/12/2022 and the application filed by the Assessee for admission of additional evidence to contend that the CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal after recording incorrect facts.

The Learned Departmental Representative supported the order passed by the Learned CIT(A). However, the Learned Departmental Representative was not able to controvert the submissions made by the Assessee regarding non-consideration of the submissions filed before the Learned CIT(A).

Given the facts and circumstances of the present case, we deem it appropriate and in the interest of justice to set aside the Order, dated 31/07/2025, passed by the Ld. CIT(A) with the directions to adjudicate the appeal afresh after granting the Assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Accordingly, Ground No.1 is allowed for statistical purpose and all the other grounds raised by the Assessee are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.