GLB FINVEST P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CC 20, MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT held that the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits rather than dismissing it for non-prosecution. The matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The assessee sought an adjournment before the ITAT as the quantum appeal was pending.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution instead of deciding it on merits.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra (HUF)659 citing240 Taxmann 133 · 2017 · HC
- CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar40 citing74 ITR 41 · 1969 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI
Before: Shri Shamim Yahya, AM & Shri Sandeep Gosain, JM
O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of learned CIT(A) dated 29.02.2016 and pertains to assessment year 2004-2005.
In this case the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for non- prosecution. Assessee has filed a petition for adjournment before us as the quantum appeal is pending for adjudication. However, since the learned CIT(A) has not passed any order on merits, we have rejected the said petition by the assessee.
Upon careful consideration, we find that learned CIT(A) in this case should have passed an order on the merits of the case and should not have dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution. For this proposition, we rely upon following case laws:-
. M/s.GLB Finvest Pvt. Ltd. (i) CIT v. T.A.Luthara HUF 240 Taxman 133 (Bombay) (ii) CIT v. S.Chenniappa Mudaliar [(1969) 74 ITR 41 (SC)] 4. In view of the aforesaid precedents, in our considered opinion the issue raised in the appeal needs to be remitted to the file of learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) shall consider the issue afresh after giving the assessee an opportunity of being heard and accordingly pass an order on the merits of the case.
In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Narottam Atmaram Warde, Raigad vs Income Tax Officer, PanvelPune9 Feb 2026Remanded
Also relies on CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar and 1 other authority
The Tribunal condoned the 413-day delay in filing the appeal, recognizing the assessee's senior citizen status and medical ailments. Citing the Bombay High Court, the Tribunal ruled that the CIT(A) does not have the powe...
- M/S. Concrete Developers, Nagpur vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…Nagpur12 Apr 2024Remanded
Also relies on CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) is not empowered to dismiss an appeal in limine for non-prosecution without dealing with the merits of the case. The CIT(A) must make necessary inquiries and decide each issue on merits ...
- Intergen Energy Ltd, Gurgaon vs ACIT Circle-12(2), New DelhiDelhi26 May 2022Remanded
Also relies on CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) does not have the power to dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution, as per Sections 251 & 252 of the Income-tax Act and various High Court and Supreme Court judgments. The CIT(A) is oblige...
- Shri Manoj Premchand Dharmani, Mumbai vs Income Tax Officer 22(2)(3), MumbaiMumbai29 Jan 2019Remanded
Also relies on CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution by the assessee, as per the rulings of the Bombay High Court and Supreme Court. The CIT(A) is obliged to dispose of the appeal on merits afte...
- Shri Advesh Sangappa Ghaniger, Belgaum vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), BelgaumPanaji28 Dec 2018Remanded
Also relies on CIT v. S. Chenniappa Mudaliar and 1 other authority
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution, as the law obliges the CIT(A) to dispose of the appeal on merits after affording a reasonable opportunity. The dismissal for non-prosecution...
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
