What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the proceedings were ex-parte throughout and, therefore, remanded the matter to the AO for fresh adjudication. The AO was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

The assessee filed a return of income, but the AO completed the assessment ex-parte under Section 144, making additions. The CIT(A) also adjudicated the appeal ex-parte as no one appeared for the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte assessment and appellate orders were valid, and if the assessee was denied a proper opportunity to be heard.

Deepak Mahnot vs DCIT | s.144 | ITAT Mumbai 2016

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.2336/M/2015 (AY: 2010-2011) Shri Ajay, DR

For Respondent: Shri Ajay, DR

Hearing: 29.06.2016Pronounced: 25.08.2016

सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 29.06.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.08.2016 आदेश / O R D E R

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM:

This appeal filed by the assessee on 23.4.2015 is against the order of the CIT (A)-46, Mumbai dated 27.11.2014 for the assessment year 2010-2011. In this appeal, assessee raised the following grounds which read as under:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed u/s 144 is bad in law and needs to be deleted.

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in assessing your appellant’s total income at Rs. 47,10,950/- as against the returned income of Rs. 29,86,256/-.

3. The AO assessed the income at Rs. 47,10,950/- and made an addition of Rs. 18,24,695/- u/s 144.”

2. Briefly stated relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and filed the return of income declaring the total income of Rs. 29,86,256/-. AO completed the assessment u/s 144 of the Act the assessed income was determined at Rs. 47,10,950/- which includes certain additions totalling to Rs. 18,24,695/-. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority.

DEEPAK MAHNOT,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 26(2), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments