VISION AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers

ITA 1012/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 October 2024AY 2011-2012Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the ex-parte order of the Ld. CIT(A) to provide the assessee another opportunity to present their case. The issues were restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after hearing the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2011-12, challenging the validity of assessment reopening and an addition of Rs. 4.44 crores related to bank transactions. The Ld. CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order as the assessee did not respond to notices.

What were the issues?

Validity of reopening of assessment and addition of Rs. 4.44 crores relating to bank transactions.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI “F” BENCH : MUMBAI

Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE

Assessment Year : 2011-12 Vision Agencies Private Limited, Income TaxOfficer-13(3)(3), 30, New Satguru Nanik 2nd Floor, Industrial Estate, vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Opp: Jai Coach Western M.K. Road, Express Highway, Mumbai. Goregaon East, Mumbai PAN : AAACV8440Q (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sunil Talati For Revenue : Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 22-10-2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22-10-2024 ORDER PER B.R. BASKARAN, A.M :

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟] and it relates to AY. 2011-12. In this appeal, the assessee is challenging the validity of reopening of assessment and also addition of Rs. 4.44 crores relating to bank transactions.

At the outset, we notice that the Ld.CIT(A) was constrained to pass the order ex-parte since the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by him. Accordingly, in the interest of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present its case properly before the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and restore all the issues to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh, after affording adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also direct the assessee to fully co-operate with the Ld.CIT(A) for expeditious disposal of this appeal.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →