OZONE INFRA PROJECTS,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 2, THANE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal agreed with the assessee that the CIT(A) failed to provide a reasonable opportunity of show-cause before making an enhancement. Therefore, the appeal was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee is aggrieved by an order confirming a tax liability and an addition of Rs. 15,50,000/- on account of cash deposited. The assessee's primary contention is that the CIT(A) made an enhancement without providing an opportunity to show cause.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) erred by enhancing the assessment without providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to show cause.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “SMC” BENCHES, MUMBAI
Before: Shri Joginder Singh
आदेश / O R D E R The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 03/08/2017 of the ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, confirming the tax liability of Rs. 3,39,998/- and addition of Rs. 15,50,000/- on account of cash deposited by the assessee in bank account.
M/s. Ozone Infra Projects 2. During hearing, I have heard Shri Dharan Gandhi ld. counsel for the assessee. The crux of arguments advanced on behalf of the assessee is that no opportunity was given to the assessee by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for making enhancement. The ld. DR contended that reasonable view has been taken by the ld.First Appellate Authority, but did not controvert the claim of the assessee that enhancement notice was not given to the assessee.
I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noted that a search was carried out on SMC group on 23/05/2012 along with the present assessee. Notice under section 153A was issued to the assessee on 31/07/2013 to which the assessee filed e-return on 24/03/2014. Without going into much deliberation, the contention of the ld. counsel for the assessee is that no opportunity was provided to the assessee for making the enhancement. It is noted that as per Section 251(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act), the ld. First Appellate Authority shall not enhance an assessment or a penalty or reduce the amount refund unless the assessee M/s. Ozone Infra Projects is given a reasonable opportunity of show-cause against such enhancement or reduction. It is worth mentioning that I am not going into the merits of the appeal, but agree with the contention of ld. counsel for the assessee that before making the enhancement, the assessee was expected to be given an opportunity/show-cause for making such enhancement. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is remanded back to the file of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to provide opportunity to the assessee to explain the factual matrix and adjudicate a fresh on merits. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.
Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 13/02/2018.
More judgments on Section 251(2)
- Sanjay Kumar Jaisinghani, Raipur vs ITO, Ward-3(1), RaipurITA 699/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Yogesh Ramdas Ghode, Nashik vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(1), NashikITA 508/PUN/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Venkataramana Dupam, Kurnool vs ITO, Ward-1, NandyalITA 180/HYD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Eye Focus Entertainment, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 16(1)(1), MumbaiITA 8283/MUM/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Bhulakshmi Srinivasarao Tulasi, Pune vs ITO, Pratyakshakar Bhavan, Akurdi PuneITA 28/PUN/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026