BROOKEFIELD CONSTRUCTIONS PVT LTD,MUMBAI V. ITO 12(1)(3), MUMBAI I

ITA 3642/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Brookefield Constructions Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, challenging an order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the learned Addl./Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Faridabad, for the assessment year 2015-16. The appellant contested several additions made to its total income, which were upheld by the CIT(A). The main issues revolved around the additions made under section 43CA and undisclosed income from the sale of apartments. The Tribunal noted that the appellant's request for a personal hearing was not granted, which was a procedural oversight under the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 782936 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 23-05-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEYAQAT ALI AAFAQUI
• Assessee Lawyers: MAMTA YADAV
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 43CA

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3642/MUM/2025 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Brookefield Constructions Pvt. Ltd., 602, 6th Floor, Sant Niwas, 394 Linking Road, 14th Road, Khar (W), Mumbai – 400052 PAN: AAFCA2216E ............... Appellant v/s Income Tax Officer – 12(1)(3), 145A, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 ……………… Respondent Assessee by : Ms. Mamta Yadav Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr.AR Date of Hearing – 29/10/2025 Date of Order - 30/10/2025 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 25/03/2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") by the learned Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Faridabad, [“learned Addl./Joint CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:– “GROUND NO.1 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3642/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) 2 The learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the order passed by the learned AO under section 143(3) of the Act, even though it is capricious in nature and has been made ignoring the established and undisputed facts. The said order is contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case and the applicable provisions of the Act and it must thus be declared invalid. GROUND NO.2 Without prejudice to ground no. 1 above, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs.21,01,000/- to the appellant's total income, under section 43CA of the Act. The said addition is contrary to the facts of the case and the applicable provisions of the Act and the same must be deleted. GROUND NO.3 Without prejudice to ground nos. 1 and 2 above, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs.55,58,941/- to the appellant's total income, on account of income not disclosed on sale of apartments. The said addition is contrary to the facts of the case and the applicable provisions of the Act and the same must be deleted. GROUND NO.4 Without prejudice to ground nos. 1 and 3 above, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the addition of Rs.39,19,843/- to the appellant's total income, on account of income not disclosed on sale of apartments. The said addition is contrary to the facts of the case and the applicable provisions of the Act and the same must be deleted.” 3. We have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the impugned order, we find that the learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) issued notice to the assessee on 15/01/2021 and 28/05/2021 for submissions of the details/evidence in support of the contentions/grounds raised in the appeal. In response, the assessee made a specific request for an opportunity for a personal hearing to make its oral submissions/present its case. Since the assessee did not file any written submissions, the learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) rejected the request of the assessee for a personal hearing through Video Conferencing. Accordingly, in the absence of any submissions from the assessee, the learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal and dismissed the same vide ex-parte impugned order. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3642/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) 3 4. We find that the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021, formulated by the Central Government in the exercise of powers conferred by sub-section (6B) and sub-section (6C) of section 250 of the Act, provides that the Appellant or his authorised representative may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submission or present his case and the concerned Commissioner (Appeals) shall allow such request and communicate the date and time of hearing to the Appellant through the National Faceless Appeal Centre. The relevant clause of the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021, in this regard, reads as follows: - “12. No personal appearance in the Centres or Units.–– (1) A person shall not be required to appear either personally or through authorised representative in connection with any proceedings under this Scheme before the income-tax authority at the National Faceless Appeal Centre or appeal unit set up under this Scheme. (2) The appellant or his authorised representative, as the case may be, may request for personal hearing so as to make his oral submissions or present his case before the Commissioner (Appeals), through the National Faceless Appeal Centre, under this Scheme. (3) The concerned Commissioner (Appeals) shall allow the request for personal hearing and communicate the date and time of hearing to the appellant through the National Faceless Appeal Centre. (4) Such hearing shall be conducted through video conferencing or video telephony, including use of any telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony, to the extent technologically feasible, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Board. (5) Any examination or recording of the statement of the appellant or any other person shall be conducted by Commissioner (Appeals) under this Scheme, exclusively through video conferencing or video telephony, including use of any telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony, to the extent technologically feasible, in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Board. (6) The Board shall establish suitable facilities for video conferencing or video telephony including telecommunication application software which supports video conferencing or video telephony at such locations as may be necessary, so as to ensure that the appellant, or his authorised representative, or any Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3642/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) 4 other person is not denied the benefit of this Scheme merely on the ground that such appellant or his authorised representative, or any other person does not have access to video conferencing or video telephony at his end.” 5. Thus, it is evident from the record that the assessee, though made the request to the learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) for grant of opportunity for personal hearing through the National Faceless Appeal Centre, the same was not granted to the assessee. Therefore, in view of the above, we deem it appropriate to restore the appeal to the file of the learned CIT(A) / learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after granting the opportunity to the assessee for personal hearing as per the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021. The assessee can make a fresh request in this regard as per the aforesaid clause (12) of the Faceless Appeal Scheme, 2021. With the above directions, the impugned order passed by the learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) is set aside. As the matter is being restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) / learned Addl./Joint CIT(A) for consideration afresh, the other grievances raised by the assessee in the present appeal do not call for adjudication at this stage. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/10/2025 Sd/- Sd/- VIKRAM SINGH YADAV ACCOUNTANT MEMBER S Sd/- SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 30/10/2025 Prabhat Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.3642/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) 5 Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "