MEET CORPORATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2064/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 February 2026AY 2020-21Bench: DR. BRR Kumar (Vice President), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)4 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, acknowledging the principle of Natural Justice and the circumstances of the Covid-19 pandemic, found that the assessee deserved a final opportunity to present its case. Consequently, both appeals were set aside, and the matters were remanded back to the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer to decide on merits after providing the assessee with due hearing and opportunity to furnish relevant materials.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed two appeals against ex-parte orders by the CIT(A) for AYs 2016-17 and 2020-21, which confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer under sections 68, 115BBE, and 57. The assessee contended that the ex-parte orders were passed without sufficient opportunity, especially given the Covid-19 pandemic period during which the reassessment notice was issued. The original assessment for AY 2016-17 was a reassessment under section 147, and for AY 2020-21, it involved unexplained credits and expenses.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte orders of assessment and appeal were valid given the assessee's inability to comply during the pandemic, and whether additions under sections 68, 115BBE, and 57 were justified without adequate opportunity of hearing.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 148,Section 68,Section 115BBE,Section 57

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “C” BENCH

Before: DR. BRR Kumar & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

ITA No: 2063 & 2064/Ahd/2025 Asst. Years: 2016-17 & 2020-21 Meet Corporation The ITO, TF 313 Super Plaza, Ward-3(1)(2), Nr. Lad Society, Vs Ahmedabad Sandesh Press Road, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380058 PAN: ABAFM6201G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented: Shri Mehul Thakkar, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 09-02-2026 Date of pronouncement : 11 -02-2026 आदेश/ORDER PER : T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER:-

These two appeals are filed by the Assessee as against separate appellate orders both dated 28-08-2025 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (in short referred to as “CIT(A)”), arising out of the reassessment order passed under section 147 and assessment order u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Years 2016-17 and 2020- 21 respectively.

& 2064/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2016-17& 2020-21 2 Meet Corporation vs. ITO

2.

The Grounds of Appeal

raised by the assessee are as follows:

1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal ex parte without appreciating the genuine cause for non-appearance.

2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the reopening under section 147 of the Act, which is bad in law and void ab initio.

3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming addition of t 88,79,500/- under section 68 of the Income Tax Act.

4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, or modify any of the above grounds at the time of hearing.

2. Ld. Counsel submitted that the notice u/s. 148 dated 31-03- 2021 was issued during the Covid-19 Pandemic period which has resulted in not filing proper reply before the A.O. which has resulted in passing exparte assessment order making addition of Rs.88,79,500/- being cash credit u/s. 68 of the Act and also taxed u/s. 115BBE of the Act

3. On filing appeal before Ld. CIT(A) who has given three opportunities of hearing between 04-06-2025, 17-06-2025 and 27- 06-2025 and dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. Ld. Counsel pleaded that one more opportunity of hearing be given to the assessee to explain its case with relevant materials.

4.

Ld. CIT-DR appearing for the Revenue strongly opposed the above submission of the assessee.

5.

We have carefully considered the submissions of rival parties. It is seen that notice u/s. 148 was issued during peak Covid-19 Pandemic period namely 31-03-2021. It is further seen from the & 2064/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2016-17& 2020-21 3 Meet Corporation vs. ITO assessment order, the assessee vide its letter dated 13-01-2022 citing some medical issue and requested for adjournment. It is thereafter on 23-03-2022, the Ld. A.O. passed exparte order by making addition u/s. 68 of the Act. Even before Ld. CIT(A) three opportunities were given by which were within a period of 24 days. Therefore in the interest of Principle of Natural Justice, we deem it fit to set-aside the matter back to the file of Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the case on merits. Needless to say the assessee should make use of this final opportunity by producing all relevant materials before the Assessing Officer.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.

7.

The assessee participated in the hearing wherein addition of Rs.8,44,07,089/- made on account of credit amount in the bank accounts not explained by the assessee and expenses u/s. 57 of the Act amounting to Rs.14,10,623/- not explained by the assessee.

8.

On appeal against the assessment order, ld. CIT(A) who has granted three hearing opportunities on 20-05-2025, 22-05-2025 and 11-07-2025. Since assessee failed to comply passed exparte order. Before us based on the undertakings of the Ld. Authorized Representative, this matter is also set-aside back to the file of & 2064/Ahd/2025 A.Ys. 2016-17& 2020-21 4 Meet Corporation vs. ITO Jurisdictional Assessing Officer and direct to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee and decide the case on merits. Needless to say the assessee should make use of this final opportunity by producing all relevant materials before the Assessing Officer.

Order pronounced in the open court on 11 -02-2026

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →