MANTRI NIRMAN LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-7(2)(1), MUMBAI

PDF
ITA 589/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 June 2024AY 2010-11Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) on 20/12/2023. The assessee's counsel stated that the CIT(A) passed the order on the same day it was supposed to make compliance after receiving a notice of hearing, without giving an opportunity to present their case.

Held

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without providing the assessee an opportunity to substantiate their case. The Tribunal also noted that the Ld. DR had no objection.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order without providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Sections Cited

143(3), 254

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH MUMBAI

For Appellant: Mr. Prakash Jhunjhunwala
For Respondent: Ms. Kakoli Ghosh
Hearing: 25/06/2024Pronounced: 28/06/2024

आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 20/12/2023 passed by ld. CIT(A) for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.254 of the Act. 2. Before us, ld. Counsel submitted that ld. CIT(A) has passed an exparte order and submitted that last date of notice of hearing was issued on 15/12/2023 for making compliance on 28/12/2023. However, on the same date ld. CIT(A) has passed

2 ITA No.589/MUM/2024 Mantri Nirman Ltd the order without giving opportunity to the assessee to substantiate its case.

3.

It has been pleaded before us that the matter should be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh.

4.

Ld. DR also does not have any objection. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is remanded back to the file of the ld. First Appellate Authority to decide the issue on merits after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 28th Jun, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 28/06/2024 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy// BY ORDER,

(Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai

MANTRI NIRMAN LTD,MUMBAI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-7(2)(1), MUMBAI | BharatTax