PEDDAR REALTY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2789/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 July 2024AY 2015-16Bench: 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 noted that while the NFAC's order mentioned issuance of notice, it was unclear if the notices were properly served. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the matter was restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi, for AY 2015-16. The assessee's grievance was that the ld. CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order, confirming an addition of Rs. 1,72,12,684/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte order passed by the ld. CIT(A) was erroneous due to non-service of proper notice and if the assessment addition was justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

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

For Appellant: Ms. Vinita Shah, A/R
Hearing: 22/07/2024Pronounced: 22/07/2024

PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the NFAC, Delhi dt. 21/03/2024, pertaining to AY 2015-16. 2. The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that, the ld. CIT(A) erred in passing the ex-parte order thereby confirming the assessment of addition of Rs.1,72,12,684/-.

3.

Having heard the rival submissions, we have carefully perused the order of the NFAC. Though there is a mention of the issuance of notice but whether the notices have been served, is not emanating from the order. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to serve a proper 2

notice and decide the issue afresh after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 22nd July, 2024 at Mumbai. (RAJ KUMAR CHAUHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 22/07/2024 *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 →