MUKESH B. BAJAJ,MUMBAI vs. ADDITIONAL JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER/NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE-DELHI, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3909/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 April 2024AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON'BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HON'BLE (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that although the assessee did not attend the appellate proceedings, they had filed written submissions and documentary evidence. The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, should have considered these submissions before disposing of the appeal.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file a return of income under section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Based on AIR information, the AO issued a notice under section 148, but the assessee again failed to file a return. The assessment was completed at an income of ₹.1,57,77,000/-.

What were the issues?

Whether the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, was justified in dismissing the appeal in-limine without considering the written submissions and documentary evidence filed by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139,Section 148

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HONBLE & SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HONBLEShri Fenil Bhat

For Appellant: Shri Fenil Bhat
For Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair
Pronounced: 15.04.2024

O R D E R PER NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (AM)

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 30.08.2023 by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12.

(A.Y: 2011-12) MUKESH B. BAJAJ 2. The solitary grievance of the assessee is that National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, dismissed the appeal of the assessee in-limine without appreciating the fact that written submissions and evidences were duly filed by the assessee.

3.

Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee did not file the return of income under section 139 of Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”). On the basis of AIR information, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act pursuant to which the assessee again chose not to file any return of income. The assessment was completed vide order dated 31.12.2018 at an income of ₹.1,57,77,000/-.

4.

The assessee agitated the matter before Ld. CIT(A) but could not attend the Appellate Proceedings and the Ld. CIT(A) / National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, dismissed the appeal.

5.

Before us, the counsel for the assessee stated that though the proceedings were not attended yet the assessee filed written submissions along with documentary evidences which were not considered by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi.

Page No. 2

(A.Y: 2011-12) MUKESH B. BAJAJ 6. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. It is true that the assessee did not attend the Appellate Proceedings. However, since the assessee has filed written submissions along with documentary evidences, then the same should have been considered before disposing off the appeal. Therefore, in the interest of justice and the fair play, we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to decide the appeal afresh, after giving a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

7.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in the open court on 15th April, 2024.

Sd/- Sd/- (SUNIL KUMAR SINGH) (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai / Dated 15.04.2024 Giridhar, Sr.PS

Page No. 3

More judgments on Section 139

All 3,629 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →