BINA RAJU RAMAIYA,MAHARASTRA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 32(1)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 3387/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Bina Raju Ramaiya, the appellant, who challenged an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2012-13. The appeal was related to additions made under sections 69 and 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, due to non-compliance with notices. The Tribunal noted the repeated absence of the assessee and the lack of any adjournment applications or responses to the notices, leading to the decision to proceed ex parte. The Tribunal found no grounds to overturn the previous decisions due to the absence of any supporting evidence or arguments from the appellant.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 473711 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUNNY KACHHWAHA
• Section: 144; 250; 69

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3387/Mum/2024 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Bina Raju Ramaiya 3A, 202, Dattani Nagar, S.V Road, Borivali (W) Mumbai – 400092. Vs. ITO, Ward 32(1)(3) Room No. 705, 7th Floor, kautilya Bhavan, C-41 To C- 43, Gblock BKC, Mumbai – 400051. PAN/GIR No. AFTPR9586A (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Sunny Kachhwaha, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 23.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 28.01.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 15.05.2024, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (‘Ld. CIT(A)’) for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. None appeared on behalf of assessee, when the case was called repeatedly. From the records I noticed that on the previous occasions assessee had sought adjournment by moving application. Today is the sixth opportunity but 2 ITA No. 3387/Mum/2024 Bina Raju Ramaiya, Mumbai neither the assessee appeared nor any application for seeking adjournment has been filed which shows that assessee is not interested in pursuing his appeal. On the other hand Ld DR present in the court is ready with the arguments. Therefore I have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex parte. 3. As per the facts of the present case, assessment under section 144 r.w.s 147 of the income tax Act was framed, as the assessee failed to respond to the notices served upon him, thereby making addition under section 69 and 69 A of the income tax Act. 4. Thereafter, the appeal filed by the assessee was also dismissed on account of the fact that assessee failed to respond to any of the notices and failed to file any details/information with regard to additions made by the AO. 5. After hearing DR and perusal of the orders passed by the revenue authorities, I found that assessee had failed to file details/documents/information as called for by the revenue authorities from time to time. Therefore, the claim of the assessee was rejected and the additions made by the AO were upheld. 3 ITA No. 3387/Mum/2024 Bina Raju Ramaiya, Mumbai 6. Even before me, the assessee has not appeared and has not filed any documentary evidences in support of the grounds raised by him. Therefore, while relying upon the provisions of section 114 of the Indian evidence Act, 1872, I draw adverse inference to the effect that had that documents which were called for from the assessee been produced, then it would have gone against the interest of the assessee. Therefore, under these facts and circumstances, and while drawing the adverse inference, I uphold the action of the AO and Ld. CIT(A). 7. Moreover, nothing has been placed before me in order to controvert or rebut the findings so recorded by the revenue authorities. Therefore I have no other option except to dismiss the appeal filed by the assessee. 8. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. .Order pronounced in the open court on 28.01.2025. Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 28/01/2025 KRK, PS 4 ITA No. 3387/Mum/2024 Bina Raju Ramaiya, Mumbai आदेश की \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ\f / The Appellant 2. \r\u000eथ\f / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0019 / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु\u0019(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. िवभागीय \rितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स\u000eािपत \rित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई / ITAT, Mumbai "