SUPREME TREON PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 14(1)(2), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal decided to remand the matter to the CIT(Appeals) to club both appeals and decide the issues on merit. This was done to ensure justice and a complete decision on common issues.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed its return of income, and an intimation under section 143(1) was issued with adjustments. The assessee also filed an appeal against an order passed under section 143(3).
What were the issues?
Whether the appeals filed against the orders under section 143(1) and 143(3) should be clubbed and decided together by the CIT(Appeals).
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY
O R D E R Per: Ratnesh Nandan Sahay, Accountant Member:
1. 1. This appeal has been filed by the assessee Company against the Order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act [the ‘Act’ in short] vide its DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1056505519(1) Dated 25.9.2023 for the Assessment Year 2018-19.
2. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2018-19 on 27th October, 2018 declaring total income at 2 Page | 2 M/s. Supreme Treon Private Limited Rs.41,61,11,090/-. Accordingly, an intimation u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act dated 17th February, 2020 was issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Centralized Processing Center (CPC) assessing the total income at Rs.43,07,54,010/- by making certain adjustments in the return of income declared by the assessee which were found to be erroneous and thus, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) against the said intimation order passed u/s. 143(1) of the IT Act. Another appeal was filed by the appellant against the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act.
3. It is emanating from the facts of the case and the grounds of appeal raised by the appellant that two appeals have been filed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT Appeal, Mumbai- one against the order u/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act and another against the order u/s 143(3) of the Act. Since the two appeals are pending on common issues, it would be in the interest of justice to remand the matter to the Ld. CIT Appeal so that the issues can be decided in its entirety. Accordingly, the matter is referred to the Ld. CIT Appeal for clubbing these two appeals to decide the issue on merit after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
4. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.04.2024.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026