NARESH PUROHIT,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 21 2(1), MUMBAI
In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal noted that no one appeared for the appellant when the appeal was called out. Furthermore, notices sent to the appellant were returned with the endorsement 'no such person found at the address'.
What were the facts?
The appellant, Naresh Purohit, challenged an order confirming the Assessing Officer's order under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal pertains to AY 2017-18. Despite a fresh notice being issued after a prior non-appearance, the appellant's representative did not appear again.
What were the issues?
Whether the appeal can proceed in the absence of the appellant and due to undelivered notices.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI
Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA
PER JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT :
By this appeal, appellant assessee is challenging the order dated 06.05.2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC), Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ for short) thereby confirming the order dated 30.03.2022 passed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’ for short) under Section 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s.144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). The appeal relates to A.Y.2017-18.
None appears for the appellant when the appeal is called out.
The record discloses that on the previous date i.e. on 25.11.2025 also there was no appearance on behalf of the appellant and hence, a fresh notice was directed to be issued to the appellant. The notice was accordingly issued and registered cover has been received back with the endorsement that ‘there is no such person’ found on the address. The notice has been received back twice.
In that view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order pronounced in the open court on 22/01/2026.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Noore Manpower Services vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- Maa Bhawani Minrals vs. Commissioner Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- Basant Kumar Gupta vs. Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- M/S Swapnashiyana Homes Developers Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
