SANTLAL BENI GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. ITO, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7128/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 February 2026AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal noted that the assessee had not challenged the validity of additions made in the original assessment before the CIT(A). Since the assessee did not appear and the prior appeal was also not maintainable, the tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s findings.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal challenging an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). The assessee failed to appear before the tribunal on multiple occasions, including the hearing date, leading the tribunal to proceed ex parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable given the assessee's non-appearance and failure to challenge additions in prior proceedings.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 250,Section 154

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI

For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar (Sr. Dr.)
Hearing: 11.02.2026Pronounced: 18.02.2026

आदेश / ORDER

PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM:

1.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 17.09.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2017-18. The following grounds are reproduced below: “1) That the learned Assessing Officer erred in adding of Rs. 10,00,000 under section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961

2) The appellant craves leaves to add, amend, alter, delete all or any of the forgoing ground of appeal

.”

2. None appeared on the behalf of assessee when the case was called repeatedly. From the case file we noticed that even on the previous occasions assessee had sought adjournments on one or the other ground but ultimately failed to appear even today before the Bench.

3.

Whereas on the contrary ld. DR is ready with the arguments therefore we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex parte.

4.

From the records we noticed that the assessee had preferred appeal before ld. CIT(A) against the order of AO passed under Section 154 of the Act wherein the AO had carried out correction of tax calculation as per law.

5.

We also noticed that the validity of the additions made in the original assessment was not at all challenged by the assessee therefore considering these facts ld. CIT(A) rightly concluded that the appeal filed by the assessee was not maintainable.

6.

After having considered the entire facts and legal propositions, we see no reason to interfere with or to deviate from findings so recorded by ld. CIT(A), hence, grounds raised in the present appeal are dismissed.

7.

In the net result appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 18.02.2026

Sd/- Sd/- (SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 18 /02/2026 RY आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 2. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 4. धिभागीय प्रधतधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,मुम्बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy//

उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,297 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →