ANUPAM INDUSTRIES,MUMBAI V. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

MA 10/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves M/s Anupam Industries, a partnership firm engaged in manufacturing steel ingots, which faced severe financial distress leading to non-appearance and non-prosecution in their initial appeal (ITA No. 2865/MUM/2024). The firm, after suffering substantial losses and being declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) by the bank, ceased operations and failed to meet basic financial obligations, including statutory compliance for tax and accounts. The Tribunal had initially decided the appeal ex-parte due to the firm's non-appearance. However, upon filing a Miscellaneous Application citing genuine reasons for their absence and presenting new evidence, the Tribunal found merit in their request to recall the earlier order and restore the appeal for a full hearing on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827675 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 17-01-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEYAQAT ALI; LD
• Assessee Lawyers: KRISHNA GUPTA; LD
• Keywords: TDS

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “A” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member And Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member M.A. No. 10/Mum/2025 arising out of ITA No. 2865/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year : 2017-18) M/s. Anupam Industries 404, Versova Godavari CHS, MHADA, Andheri-West Mumbai-400 053. Vs. NFAC, Delhi PAN : AASFA4736D Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Krishna Gupta, Ld. AR Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali, Ld. DR Date of Hearing : 31/10/2025 Date of pronouncement : 06/01/2026 O R D E R Per Narender Kumar Choudhry (JM) :- In the instant case, the appeal filed by the assessee being ITA No. 2865/Mum/2024 was decided vide order dated 31.7.2024, as ex-parte for non-prosecution/non-appearance of the assessee, however, with liberty to the assessee to seek recalling of the said order by establishing valid reason for non- appearance and/or non-substantiating its claim before the authorities below and the Tribunal as well. Printed from counselvise.com Anupam Industries 2 2. The assessee therefore by filing instant Miscellaneous Application has sought for recalling of the said order dated 31.7.2024 mainly on the following grounds: - 1. Applicant, M/s Anupam Industries (PAN: AASFA4736D) is a partnership firm which was engaged in the business of manufacturing steel ingots. 2. Applicant states that due to severe losses in the past few years, its operations came to a grinding haft somewhere in A.Y. 2018-19. Bank also declared the Firm NPA in A.Y. 2018-19. 3. Applicant states that due to the severe financial stress, Firm was not stele to meet its financial obligations even towards basic sustainability of its existence including wages and salaries to toe paid to staff and consultants. Therefore, the consultants and staff lost their interest in Firm's activities and hence, work of carrying out tax and account compliance got totally ignored and was left pending without information or knowledge of the partners. 4. Somewhere on 01.10.2021, proceedings under the Faceless Assessment Scheme, 2019 was initiated against the Applicant for the AY 2017-18. 5. After having knowledge that the return has not been filed, Applicant in response to the Notice from the Department, managed to file the income tax return for A.Y. 2017-18 of loss of INR 1,39,60,980/- on 31.05.2021. 6. Applicant states that due to severe tosses and even inability to pay wages and salaries, Firm finally had to shut down its business and operates in A.Y. 2018-19. Thereafter, Firm had no employee or consultants to look after statutory compliance, even for collating and presenting the documents/information 7. Applicant states that they did not receive any notice, as so stated in impugned order. On enquiry, the Applicant has come to know from the former consultants that they did not receive arty email communication from the income Tax Department. Hence, Applicant could not be represented in the matter, for no fault on their part. 8. Applicant states that finally through persistent follow up and request to earlier consultants, Applicant finally came to know about the current Printed from counselvise.com Anupam Industries 3 status of the case i.e. about the Order of Hon'ble ITAT dated 31.07.2024, on 18th December 2024. 9. Applicant states that after great efforts, they have now been able to retrieve, collate and organize the necessary information/ documents such as cash book, bank statement, profit & loss account, balance sheet etc, for the relevant period to be able to make the \"necessary submissions and thereby present its case on merit before the Hon'ble ITAT with respect to the A.Y. 2017-18. 10. It is submitted that Applicant had huge losses, as disclosed in belated return of income hut while passing the Order, AO has added various amounts terming them as unexplained, which are otherwise explainable. Brief chart of added income in assessment are as follows: Sr. No. Information Description Amount (INR) Total loss as per return 1,39,60,980 1 . Add: TCS Statement- Scrap (Code 6CE) 8,69,749 2 . Add: Cash deposits in current account (SFT- 003) 1,24,58,365 3 . Add: Cash withdrawals from current account (SFT-003) 1,63,26,090 4 . Add: TDS Return- Other interest (Section 194A) 15,513 Total Assessed Profit 1,57,08,737 11. Applicant submits that they have s prima facie case on merit in their favour. Applicant states that unless and until the reliefs as prayed for are granted; grave loss, harm and prejudice would be caused to the Applicants, which cannot be compensated hi terms of money. Balance of Convenience is also in favour of the Applicants as no prejudice shall be caused to the Department, if the matter is heard on merit, which shall at best result into just decision in the matter i.e. complete justice in the matter. And irreparable loss will be caused to the Applicant if this Application is not allowed. There are no latches/ negligence on their part. 3. The Ld. DR did not refute the aforesaid contentions/ grounds raised by the assessee for recalling of the order. Printed from counselvise.com Anupam Industries 4 4. Having heard the parties and considering the relevant material available on record and giving thoughtful consideration to the claims of the parties, it is observed that the reasons stated by the assessee for not substantiating its claim before the authorities below and the Tribunal and non-appearance before the Tribunal, prima facie appears to be genuine, bonafide, plausible and unintentional and thus, we are inclined to recall the order dated 31.7.2024. Hence the order dated 31.7.2024 is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number and directed to be fixed before the regular Bench in due course of time, while issuing advance notice to the parties. 5. In the result, Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 06/01/2026. Sd/- Sd/-/- (Girish Agrawal) (Narender Kumar Choudhry) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ms. Pratima, Sr. PS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "