SUPARNA MODY TRUST,MUMBAI vs. WARD 19(3)(1), MUMBAI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH G, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HONBLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HONBLE
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA NO. 4326/MUM/2023 (A.Y: 2021-22) SUPARNA MODY TRUST v. ITO-WARD 19(3)(1) 22 Mahalaxmi Chambers Matru Mandir, Mumbai Bhulabhai Desai Road, Mumbai Maharashtra - 400007 Maharashtra-400026 PAN: AAVTS3379K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : None Department Represented by : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule
Date of conclusion of Hearing : 30.04.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 30.04.2024
O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (AM)
This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 04.10.2023 by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to A.Y.2021-2022.
ITA NO. 4326/MUM/2023 (A.Y: 2021-22) SUPARNA MODY TRUST 2. The grievance of the assessee read as under: -
“1. The National Faceless Appeal Centre Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] has erred in dismissing the appeal without providing due opportunity of being heard and also not deciding on merit of the case. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, order passed by the CIT(A) is unjustified, illegal, against the provision of the Act and against the principles of natural justice. The below grounds are without prejudice to ground no 1: 2. The learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of AO of computing LTCG chargeable @10% under section 112A at Rs. 8,07,055/- without allowing set off of loss under section 112A Rs. 3,20,275/-. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the long-term capital loss of Rs. 3,20,275/- ought to be set off against the long-term capital gain of the year. 3. The learned CIT (A) has erred in confirming the action of AO of computing surcharge of Rs. 24,39,738/- (@37.89% on total assessed income), instead of slab wise rate provided in the Act. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the surcharge on Dividend and Capital gains u/s 112A& 111A should be restricted to 15% and on balance income the surcharge has to be restricted to 25% as computed by appellant. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/or rescind any grounds of appeal during the course of the hearing.”
None appeared on behalf of the assessee, in spite of the notice. We decide to proceed exparte. Ld. DR was heard at length. Case records carefully perused.
On perusal of the order of the First Appellate Authority show that the appeal of the assessee has been dismissed in limine. In the interest
Page No. 2
ITA NO. 4326/MUM/2023 (A.Y: 2021-22) SUPARNA MODY TRUST of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh on merits of the case, after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after serving a proper notice.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th April, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai / Dated 30.04.2024 Giridhar, 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, Mum
Page No. 3
