BHARAT S. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ITO 15(2)(2), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter for a fresh assessment by the Assessing Officer. The assessee was to be given a reasonable opportunity to present the books of account and other documents.
What were the facts?
The assessee's income was assessed at Rs. 20,08,030/- due to the inability to produce books of account and vouchers during assessment. The assessee claimed to have recovered the books of account at the CIT(A) stage.
What were the issues?
Whether the matter should be remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment when the assessee is now in a position to produce books of account and other relevant documents.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI G.S.PANNU
ORDER The captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2010-11 is directed against an order passed by CIT(A)-32, Mumbai dated 08/01/2016, which in turn, arises out of an order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) dated 23/03/2013.
In this appeal, though the assessee has raised multiple Grounds of appeal, but the grievance revolves around the income assessed by the Assessing Officer at Rs.20,08,030/- as against the returned income of Rs.6,04,831/- after making various additions/disallowances.
3. At the time of hearing, Ld. Representative for the assessee pointed out that the primary reason weighing with the Assessing Officer to make the addition was the inability of the assessee to produce books of account and other vouchers, etc. The Ld. Representative for the assessee pointed out that at the time of assessment proceedings assessee had explained that the concern responsible for writing and maintenance of books of account for the assessee was in dispute with the assessee and, therefore, they were unwilling to hand over the documents so as to present them before the Assessing Officer. However, at the stage of appeal before the CIT(A), assessee had asserted that the assessee had recovered his books of account from his book keeper and was in a position to produce the same. In spite of the same, the CIT(A) has not allowed appropriate relief and has neither given regard to the ability of the assessee to produce the books of account. Under these circumstances, the preliminary plea raised is to the effect that the matter be remanded back to the file of Assessing Officer for an assessment afresh, since assessee was in a position to furnish the relevant books of account and other documents.
The Ld. Departmental Representative had no objection to the aforesaid preliminary plea raised on behalf of the assessee.
Considering the submissions put-forth by the assessee, I deem it fit and proper to set-aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter for a denovo assessment by the Assessing Officer, who shall allow the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard before passing an order afresh in accordance with law.
In the result, without going into the merits of various points raised, the appeal is disposed off on the preliminary issue as above. 6. Resultantly, appeal of the assessee is allowed Order pronounced in the open court on 09/12/2016
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026