DHIRAL RAMESH SANGOI ,KOPARKHAIRANE vs. ITO, WARD 19(1)(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-compliance to notices. The assessment order was framed ex-parte under Section 144 of the Act as the assessee did not respond to AO's queries. The CIT(A) confirmed an addition of Rs. 13,91,618/-.
Held
The Tribunal held that even if the assessee is not responding to notices, the CIT(A) ought to have decided the appeal on merits. For justice and fair play, the appeal is restored to the CIT(A).
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without deciding on merits, and whether the addition made by the AO was justified.
Sections Cited
144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HON’BLE
आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत /Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��थ� / The Respondent 2. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned Pr. CIT 3. 4. आयकर आयु� अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- िवभागीय �ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 5. 6. गाड� फाई/ Guard file.
आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY
Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Mumbai