BEAM HIGHWAY SOLUTION PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE � 6(4), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 9366/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Beam Highway Solution Private Limited, which filed appeals against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment years 2018-19 to 2021-22. The appeals challenged the assessments made under sections 144 and 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging violations of natural justice, reliance on uncorroborated materials, and incorrect additions to income. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not effectively represented their case before the lower authorities despite multiple opportunities. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and remand the case back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh assessment, imposing a cost on the assessee for non-cooperation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 846309 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Mumbai
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Appeal Filed On: 30-12-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ALOK SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVI GANATRA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Unexplained cash credit; Principle of natural justice; TDS; Initiation of penalty proceedings
• Section: 147; 148; 144; 145; 133A

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.9365/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) & ITA No.9366/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) & ITA No.9367/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2020-21) & ITA No.9368/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2021-22) Beam Highway Solution Private Limited 708, Gateway Plaza CHS, A S Marg, Hiranandani Gardens, Powai, Mumbai- 400076 Vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 6(4), Mumbai Kautilya Bhawan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai- 400051 PAN/GIR No. AAHCB2394J (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Ravi Ganatra Revenue by Shri. Alok Singh, CIT-DR. Date of Hearing 12.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.03.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER BENCH Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 9365- 9368/Mum/2025 Beam Highway Solution Private Limited The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 25.10.2025 and 29.10.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, CIT(A)-54, Mumbai for the assessment years 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22. 2. Now we first take up the ITA No. 9365/Mum/2025 for A.Y. 2018-19, raising following grounds: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in sustaining the order of assessment passed by the Ld Assessing Officer u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, when the same is clearly outside the sanction of law, illegal, unjust, invalid, bad-in-law and therefore liable to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the assessment order passed by the Ld Assessing Officer u/s 144 r.w.s 147, without providing reasonable opportunity of being heard and thus in violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the additions made by Ld. Assessing Officer solely on the basis of WhatsApp chats and third-party statements without bringing on record any cogent corroborative material thus making the said additions unsustainable in law. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition made u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when the appellant has not been found to be the owner of any money, bullion, jewelry or any other valuable article or thing which is not recorded in the books of account as maintained. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 9365- 9368/Mum/2025 Beam Highway Solution Private Limited 5. Without prejudice, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the additions of Rs 8.07,70,400/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of alleged unexplained cash deposits in the appellant's bank accounts without giving credit for cash withdrawals an admitted by Ld. Assessing Officer himself 6. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Lid. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs 8,07,70,400/-/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 made by the Ld. Assessing Officer when no unaccounted assets or cash were found at the premises of the appellant company during the course of survey action w/s 133A of the Act 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs 8,07,70,400/-/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as made by the Ld. Assessing Officer merely on the basis of whatsapp/email communications without bringing on record any corroborative material and without the mandatory certification as warranted under section 65B(4) of the Evidence Act. 8. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs 8,07,70,400/- u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when the addition has been made by the Ld. Assessing Officer placing reliance on the statements of Shri Prakash Manohar Dhavale, Director of the appellant company and Shri Gopal Jagdish Damle, Assistant Accountant in M/s A. N. Enterprises Infrastructure Services P Limited recorded during the course of survey action conducted u/s 133A of the Act, despite the fact that not only both the statements lacks evidentiary value but also do not provide any incriminating or adverse evidence. 9. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition u/s 68A made by the Ld. Assessing Officer without any application of mind and placing unduly heavy reliance solely on two Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 9365- 9368/Mum/2025 Beam Highway Solution Private Limited statements recorded u/s 133A of the Act and treating invoices found and seized during the search as incriminating material, without conducting any independent inquiry or bring on record any corroborative material. 10. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs 97,99,29,400-ucs 63 rws 1150BE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account of alleged unexplained cash credits in the books of accounts of the appellant company 11 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in upholding the assessment order passed by the Lil Assessing Officer as he failed to appropriately consider and allow the fresh lawful claim of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) amounting to Rs 38,77,551- mised by the appellant company in the return filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 resulting in an incorrect assessment and unjust tax liability. 12. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred on facts and in law in confirming the adstions of Rs 8,07,70,400/- and Rs 97,99,29,600/-without rejecting the books of accounts and without invoking section 145 of the Act 13. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the levy of interest of Rs 53,26,03,955/- u/s 234A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 14. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the levy of interest of Rs 66,37,06,467/- u/s 2348 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 15. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No. 9365- 9368/Mum/2025 Beam Highway Solution Private Limited 16. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in upholding the initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 2724(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 17. The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend, modify and/or delete all or any of the foregoing grounds of appeal. The appellant prays before the Hon'ble Tribunal to delete the additions made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT (A) and/ or any other relief as the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit.” 2. At the very outset we noticed that assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A) and also before the Ld.AO. We also noticed that 8 opportunities were granted by the Ld.AO and 3 opportunities were granted by the Ld. CIT(A) before deciding the appeal of the assessee. 3. Be that as it may be without going into the merits of the issue raised by the assessee and considering the facts that the assessee could not put effective representation before the Revenue authorities, therefore, considering the interest of the justice, the bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to present its case before the Ld. AO therefore, considering over all circumstances of the present case we deem it proper to set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for deciding the same afresh in a de novo assessment, subject to cost of Rs. 15,000/- imposed on the assessee for not cooperating with the Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No. 9365- 9368/Mum/2025 Beam Highway Solution Private Limited Revenue authorities. The said cost shall be deposited by the assessee in the Prime Ministers Relief Fund and the copy of the receipt shall be placed on the file before Ld. AO within 30 days from the date of the receipt of this order. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 4. Before parting, we want to make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. AO shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute which shall be adjudicated by CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 5. Needless to mention that the Ld. AO shall provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. ITA No.9366/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2019-20); ITA No.9367/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2020-21) And ITA No.9368/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2021- 22) 6. As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to ITA No 9365/Mum/2025 for the A.Y 2018-19 Printed from counselvise.com 7 ITA No. 9365- 9368/Mum/2025 Beam Highway Solution Private Limited therefore, the decision rendered in above paragraphs would apply mutatis mutandis for these appeals also. 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 23.03.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (JAGADISH) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 23/03/2026 Disha Raut, Stenographer आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. धिभागीय प्रधतधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,मुम्बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy// उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "