RAJKUMAR GHANSHYAMDAS BAJAJ,GUJRAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAX WARD 1(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 3366/MUM/2023Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 January 2024Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI (Accountant Member), SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and in not disposing of the appeal on merits. The tribunal found that there was a sufficient cause for the delay as the assessee was outside India and the address for notices was incorrect. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a non-resident, failed to file a return of income. Information was received about the sale of immovable property and high-value transactions. The Assessing Officer passed an ex-parte assessment order under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A) was justifiable and whether the CIT(A) erred in not deciding the appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 144,Section 147,Section 139,Section 249(3),Section 249(2)(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM & SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JM

For Appellant: Mr. Ayush Chhajed
For Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR

PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM:

01.

This appeal is filed by Shri Rajkumar Ghanshyamdas Bajaj [Assessee / Appellant] against the Appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 55, Mumbai [Ld. CIT(A)] dated 31.8.2023 for Assessment Year 2011-12, wherein the appeal filed by the Assessee against the Rajkumar Ghanshyamdas Bajaj; A.Y. 2011-12 assessment order passed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of The Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) dated 19.12.2018 passed by the ITO(IT)-1(2)(1), Mumbai (Ld. AO) was dismissed.

02.

The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

i) The Ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciate that the date of service of order was 3.01.2019 a a

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →