ZUBBIN KHMBATTA,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD 20(3)(1), PIRAMAL CHAMBER, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2359/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 July 2024Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A)-NFAC's findings were made ex-parte and lacked proper adjudication as per Section 250(6) of the Act. Consequently, the Revenue's contentions were rejected.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for assessment year 2016-2017 arose from an order by CIT(A)-NFAC which upheld the Assessing Officer's action of adding Rs. 2,76,50,010/- as unexplained expenditure, done ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)-NFAC's ex-parte order upholding the addition of unexplained expenditure was proper and compliant with statutory requirements.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 69C,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA

Hearing: 24.07.2024Pronounced: 26.07.2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “G” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2359/Mum./2024 Assessment Year 2016-2017 Zubbin Khambatta, The Income Tax Officer, H-2, Navroze Baug, Ward-20(3)(1), Piramal Lalbaug, Mumbai–400012. Chamber, Lal Baug, Lower Maharashtra. vs. Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 PAN AEWPK3442G Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sumit Mantri For Revenue : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 24.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M.

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2016- 2017 arises against the order of the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi’s DIN & order no.ITBA/ NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1062116462(1), dated 06.03.20224, in proceedings u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2 ITA.No.2359/MUM./2024

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)-NFAC’s lower appellate findings; upholding the Assessing Officer’s action inter alia making sec.69C unexplained expenditure addition of Rs.2,76,50,010/-; as ex-parte; and that too without ensuring compliance to sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with this situation, we reject the Revenue’s vehement contentions and deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)-NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

3 ITA.No.2359/MUM./2024 Order pronounced in the open Court on 26.07.2024

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →