SUHAS PANDURANG MOHITE,PALGHAR vs. ITO, WARD--1, PALGHAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1798/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 July 2024AY 2013-14Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, HON'BLE (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 found that the NFAC had dismissed the appeal in limine and that the facts discussed in the order did not pertain to the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the NFAC/CIT(A) with a direction to decide it afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC). The appeal was delayed, but the delay was condoned as the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause. The assessee's grievance was that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine based on facts pertaining to another assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine on facts pertaining to another assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “J” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora (Virtaully Appeared)
Hearing: 25/07/2024Pronounced: 25/07/2024

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, dt. 09/02/2024, pertaining to AY 2013-14. 2. This appeal is barred by limitation. We have considered the reasons given for delay in filing of the appeal in the affidavit. We find that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause. Therefore the delay is condoned.

3.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine on facts which pertain to some other assessee.

4.

We have carefully perused the order of the NFAC. We find that the NFAC has dismissed the appeal in limine but at the same time we 2

find that the facts discussed in the order do not pertain to the assessee but it appears that they pertain to some other assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice we restore this appeal to the file of the NFAC/CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee by way of proper serving of notice through e-mail.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 25th July, 2024 at Mumbai. (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 25/07/2024 *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs *SC SrPs

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. आयकर आयु" अपील

4.

( ) / The CIT(A)- िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई /DR,ITAT, Mumbai, 5. गाड" फाई/ Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →