OPTIMYSTIX ENTERTAINMENT INDIA P.LTD, MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT (TDS) RG 10(3)(1), MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording an opportunity of being heard, violating principles of natural justice. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing a hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee company received an intimation under section 200A for short deduction of TDS and interest. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as unmaintainable without a hearing, holding that an intimation under section 200A is not appealable under section 246A.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal as unmaintainable without providing a hearing to the assessee. Whether an intimation under section 200A is appealable under section 246A.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI G.S.PANNU& SHRI AMARJIT SINGH.
ORDER PER G.S.PANNU,A.M: The captioned appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2011-12 is directed against an order passed by CIT(A)- 60, Mumbai dated 08/01/2015 which in turn arises out of an intimation dated 1/7/2011 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).
In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following Grounds of appeal:-
1. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal in law without giving a hearing to the appellant. 1.1 The Ld.CIT(Appeals) erred in holding that the appeal was not maintainable under section 246A of ACT.
2 /MUM/2015 (Assessment Year : 2011-12) 2.The Ld. CIT(Appeals) ought to have admitted the appeal and disposed of the grounds raised in the memo of appeal inform 35.”
3. The brief facts are that the respondent assessee is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and is, inter-alia, engaged in the business of production of television serials. During the course of its business, assessee was required to deduct tax at source on various payments made by it as per relevant provisions of the Act. The assessee company received an intimation dated 1/7/2011 under section 200A of the Act, whereby it was held that assessee had short deducted tax at source in certain cases and interest in such cases was also charged for such shortfall in deduction of tax at source. The intimation under section 200A of the Act was challenged in appeal before the CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as unadmitted. As per CIT(A), an intimation passed under section 200A was not an appealable order in terms of section 246A of the Act and thus, such an appeal was liable to be dismissed as not maintainable. Against such a decision, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
4. Before us, the plea of the assessee is that the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without affording an opportunity of being heard. Ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that the only grievance of the assessee is that the CIT(A) be directed to allow the assessee an opportunity of being heard before adjudicating on the maintainability of the appeal. It was thus, contended that the matter be restored back to the file of CIT(A) for the said purpose.
5. Ld. Departmental Representative has not opposed the plea of the assessee for restoration of the matter back to the file of CIT(A) for the above reason.
More judgments on Section 200A
- Mulchand Ramkishan Laddha, Pune vs Income Tax Officer (TDS-2), PuneITA 874/PUN/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2013-14
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2669/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2668/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2667/PUN/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2015-16
- Suyash Dhondu Paste, Ratnagiri vs Income Tax Officer, TDS, KolhapurITA 2666/PUN/2026[2014-15]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2014-15
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Vandemataram Projects Private Limited vs. Raipur Development AuthorityChhattisgarh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Surya Prakash Aroma vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 27 Oct 2026
- Mrs. Aqsa Begum vs. Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Govindjee Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Central Goods And Services TaxRajasthan · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026