M/S CONCISE EXIM PVT LTD,THANE vs. ITO WARD 2 (1), THANE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to appear and comply with notices, and that documents filed before the CIT(A) were not considered. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) to provide the assessee with another opportunity to be heard.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order upholding reassessment proceedings and adding back Rs. 31 crore as unexplained cash credit. The assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) or the Tribunal despite notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the reassessment proceedings and notice under Section 148 were valid, and whether the addition of Rs. 31 crore as unexplained cash credit under Section 68 was justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON’BLE & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HONBLEShri H.M. Bhatt
O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM)
This appeal is filed by the assessee against order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter in short “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 11.07.2023 for the A.Y.2011-12.
(A.Y: 2011-12) M/s Concise Exim Private Limited 2. Assessee has raised following grounds in its appeal: - “1. That the order dated 11.07.2023 passed u/s 250 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the "Act") by the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi is against law and facts on the file in as much as he has not justified to uphold the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer in resorting the reassessment proceedings and issuing notice under section 148 of the Act since the notice issued under section 148 is bad in law.
2. That the order dated 11.07.2023 passed u/s 250 of the "Act" by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi is against law and facts on the file in as much as he was not justified to uphold the action of the Ld. Assessing Officer, Ward 2(1), Thane in adding back a sum of Rs. 31,00,00,000/- received by the Appellant Company as share capital/premium from various companies by treating the said receipt as an alleged unexplained cash credit u/s 68 of the Act on the ground that the Appellant Company has, allegedly, failed to prove the identity, creditworthiness of the investors and genuineness of the transactions by ignoring the import of the exhaustive submissions alongwith documentary evidence filed both during the assessment and first appellate proceedings.
3. That the Appellant craves to add, amend, alter, modify or delete any or all of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.”
At the outset, we observe from the record that, inspite of issue of notice none appeared on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment was sought. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of this appeal with the assistance of Ld.DR.
Ld. DR brought to our notice relevant facts of the case and relied on the orders of the lower authorities. Further, Ld. DR submitted that assessee has not utilized the opportunity provided by the Ld.CIT(A), therefore, the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is exparte order.
Page No. 2
(A.Y: 2011-12) M/s Concise Exim Private Limited 5. Considered the submissions of Ld. DR and material placed on record. On a perusal of the assessment order and Ld.CIT(A) order, we find that even though the Ld.CIT(A) provided opportunity on several occasions, assessee could not appear nor complied to the notices issued. Further, we observe that certain documents were filed before Ld. CIT(A) but the same were not considered in adjudication. Considering the totality of facts and keeping in view the additions / disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, we are of the opinion that assessee should be given one more opportunity of being heard. Accordingly, in the interest of justice we are of the view that this matter should go back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for proper verification as per law. Assessee shall cooperate with the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) without taking unnecessary adjournments. Needless to say that the Ld.CIT(A) shall give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, this appeal is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) accordingly.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
More judgments on Section 148
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Adj Agri International LLP, Rajkot vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1198/RJT/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
