M/S.PRABHA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 15(2)(4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7449/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 March 2019AY 2012-133 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted the assessee's negligence but found that the first appellate authority did not pass a speaking order. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the first appellate authority for re-adjudication after providing an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to make submissions before the assessing officer and the first appellate authority, leading to best judgment assessment and dismissal of appeal. The assessee sought adjournment due to the director's medical condition, and a delay in filing the appeal was condoned.

What were the issues?

Whether the first appellate authority's order was a speaking order and if the assessee should be given another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144

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, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2012-13 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-24, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-24/ITO-15(2)(4)/IT-419/2015-16 dated 24/08/2017 on various grounds of appeal. The Ld. AR sought adjournment in the matter vide letter dated 17/03/2019 which has been rejected by the bench. Accordingly, the matter is heard on the basis of material on record and M/s. Prabha Projects Pvt.Ltd. Assessment Year :2012-13 after hearing Ld. Departmental Representative, who submitted that the assessee has remained negligent in attending the proceedings before lower authorities.

2.

The registry has noted a delay of 35 days, the condonation of which is being sought by the assessee on the strength of the affidavit of the director of the assessee company. The delay has been attributed to the severe medical conditions being faced by the director. Keeping in view the same, the delay is condoned.

3.

Brief facts are that the assessee has been assessed on best judgment basis u/s 144 on 23/03/2015 at Rs.151.54 Lacs since the assessee failed to make any submissions. Similar was the situation before first appellate authority wherein Ld. CIT(A), by applying the ratio of Multiplan India Ltd. 38 ITD 320 dismissed the appeal.

4.

Upon careful consideration, the undisputed position that emerges is that the assessee has remained negligent in attending the proceedings before all the authorities. However, we find that first appellate authority has not disposed-off the appeal by passing a speaking order. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we remit the matter back to the file of Ld. first appellate authority to re-adjudicate the same after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, who, in turn, is directed to substantiate his claim failing which the authorities shall be at liberty to dispose-off the same on the basis of material on record.

5.

Resultantly, the appeal stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.

1.

M/s. Prabha Projects Pvt.Ltd. Assessment Year :2012-13 Order pronounced in the open court on 22nd March, 2019. Sd/- Sd/- (Mahavir Singh) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) �ाियक सद� / Judicial Member लेखा सद� / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; िदनांक Dated : 22/03/2019 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese आदेशकी�ितिलिपअ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 1. ��थ�/ The Respondent 2. आयकरआयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकरआयु�/ CIT– concerned 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड�फाईल / Guard File 6.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →