DWARKA SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 6(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2298/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Dwarka Securities Pvt Ltd, which appealed against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2011-12. The primary issue was the assessee's inability to effectively represent itself in the earlier proceedings due to not receiving notices of hearing, as they were sent to an outdated email address. The Tribunal acknowledged the reasonable cause for the assessee's non-appearance and decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing, emphasizing the need for fair representation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712179 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANNAVARAMKOSURI
• Assessee Lawyers: SS NAGAR AW VIPUL JAIN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 1912 & 2298/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Dwarka Securities Pvt Ltd 301 & 302 Atlanta Centre Near Udyog Bhavan, Goregaon E, Mumbai – 400063 Vs. ITO, Ward – 6(2)(1) Aayakar Bhavan MK Road Mumbai – 400021. PAN/GIR No. AABCD7186N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri SS Nagar a/w Mr. Vipul Jain Revenue by Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. AR Date of Hearing 14.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 29.01.2025 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) / CIT(A) for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. Since all the issues involved in these two appeals are common and identical, therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and consolidated order is being passed for Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.1912 & 2298/Mum/2025 Dwarka Securities Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take ITA No. 2298/Mum/2025, A.Y 2011-12 as lead case and facts narrated therein. ITA No. 2298/Mum/2025, A.Y 2011-12 3. At the very outset, we noticed that assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A). In this regard Ld. AR explained the circumstances before the bench which prevented the assessee to represent properly before Ld. CIT(A) and in this regard the assessee had filed a letter mentioning the reasons, which is reproduced herein below: 1) I, GOPI KRISHAN MAKHARIA, Director of Dwarka Securities Private Limited, aged about 78 years, s/o Late Shri Pushkar Dutt Makharia identified by PAN ABHPM8102F, residing at Address Wing Gokuldham, Goregaon East, Mumbai 400063 do solemnly affirm and state on oath 603, Lakshchandi Heights, as under: 2) That the Assessment Order in case of the appellant for the Assessment Year 2011-12 was passed under section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (\"the Act\") on 20-12-2017. 3) Aggrieved by additions made in the aforesaid assessment order, the appellant filed appeal before Learned Commissioner of Income Tax - (Appeals) [\"the Ld. CIT-(A)] on 27-01-2018. A copy of the Form-35 is attached for your reference. 4) Against the appeal filed, the Ld. CIT-(A) issued notices of hearing on various dates, which were not received by the appellant neither by post nor on given mail id i.e. [e-mail]. It is respectfully submitted that the notices were issued to the email id which belonged to a person Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.1912 & 2298/Mum/2025 Dwarka Securities Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. who had already left the organization. As a result, the appellant remained unaware of the notices and could not attend the hearings. This fact was also mentioned in the grounds of appeal submitted before the CIT(A). 5) The appellant on going through the E-filing portal noticed that Ld. CIT-(A) issued notice of hearing on 30.11.2023, 02.01.2024, 10.01.2024 and 13.02.2024 and in response to the latest notice requested for the adjournment and refix the hearing by issuing fresh notice. The appellant updated new e-mail address on the portal which was [e-mail] 6) The Ld. CIT-(A) without considering the adjournment request and above factual aspects dispose of the order without considering the adjournment filed by the appellant and passed the order u/s 250 of the Act on 29-01-2025. 7) That the appellant had no intention to jeopardize the interest of the revenue by not replying to the notice of hearing. 3. On the other hand DR relied upon the orders passed by the revenue authorities. 4. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that there was reasonable cause, because of which assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Hence the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee. Since Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.1912 & 2298/Mum/2025 Dwarka Securities Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. there was non cooperation on behalf of the assessee during the proceedings before the revenue authorities therefore a cost of Rs. 2,000/- is imposed upon the assessee which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and a copy of the receipt shall be placed on file before Ld. CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 5. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 1912/Mum/2025 7. As the facts and circumstances in these appeals are identical to ITA No 22298/Mum/2025 for the A.Y 2011-12 (except variance in figures) and the decision rendered in above paragraph would apply mutatis mutandis for this appeal also. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the present appeal also stands allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.1912 & 2298/Mum/2025 Dwarka Securities Pvt Ltd., Mumbai. 8. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.07.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (GIRISH AGRAWAL) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 24/07/2025 KRK, PS आदेश की \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. \u000eथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0019 / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु\u0019(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,मु\u0003बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, स\u000eािपत ित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई / ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "