GREEN GLOBE METAL PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. JURISDICTIONAL ASSESSING OFFICER 12(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 121/MUM/2026

AI Insights

The case involves Green Globe Metal Private Limited, which faced ex parte assessment and appellate proceedings due to repeated non-compliance in providing necessary details to the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Mumbai decided to restore the matter to the AO for a fresh assessment, emphasizing the need for the assessee to cooperate fully. Furthermore, the Tribunal addressed a Stay Application concerning the attachment of the assessee's bank accounts, which had disrupted its business operations. The Tribunal ordered the release of one bank account to allow the continuation of business activities while maintaining the attachment on other accounts pending further orders.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 837895 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2026
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRATHMESH LAWAND
• Assessee Lawyers: NISHIT GANDHI; ADNYA BHANDARI; ARS
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Corroborative evidences; Application of stay

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 121/Mum/2026 Assessment Year: 2022-23 & S.A. No. 27/Mum/2026 I.T.A. No. 121/Mum/2026 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Green Globe Metal Private Limited 415, 416 Zest Business Space MG Road Rajawadi Mumbai - 400077 [PAN: AAFCG2133G] Vs. Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, 12(2)(1) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nishit Gandhi & Ms. Adnya Bhandari, ARs Revenue by Shri Prathmesh Lawand, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 19.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 20.02.2026 ORDER Per Smt. Beena Pillai, JM: Present appeal arises out of order dated 10/11/2025, passed by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the Ld.CIT(A)”] for AY, 2022-23. 2. It is observed that the assessment as well as the first appellate proceedings were completed ex parte due to repeated non-compliance on the part of the assessee. Despite having been afforded sufficient opportunities, the assessee failed to furnish the requisite details either before the Ld. AO or before the Ld. CIT(A). Such a casual approach towards statutory proceedings cannot be countenanced. 2.1. However, considering that the issues involved require examination of facts and supporting evidences, and in the interest Printed from counselvise.com 2 S.A. No. 27/Mum/2026 of substantial justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the matter to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the set-aside proceedings and to furnish all necessary details and evidences in support of its claims. 2.2. At the same time, in view of the non-cooperative conduct of the assessee which has resulted in avoidable litigation and wastage of judicial time, we deem it fit to impose a cost of ₹10,000/-. The said amount shall be paid by the assessee to the State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, and proof of such payment shall be furnished before the Ld. AO. Failure to comply with this direction may entail adverse inference in the set-aside proceedings. The Ld.AO is directed to pass a detailed order after carrying necessary verification in respect of the evidences furnished by the assessee, in accordance with law. Needless to say that, proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. 3. The assessee has also filed a Stay Application seeking stay of recovery of outstanding demand and lifting of bank account attachments. 3.1. The Ld. AR submitted that, the outstanding demand also includes penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act. He submitted that, following accounts of assessee has been attached:- 1. Bank: HDFC Bank; Account No.: 50200069844496 2. Bank: Kotak Mahindra Bank; Account No.: 6047218330 3.1.1. The Ld.AR submitted that, due to attachment of the bank accounts, the business operations of the assessee have come to a standstill. It was requested that at least one bank account may Printed from counselvise.com 3 S.A. No. 27/Mum/2026 be released to enable the assessee to carry on its day-to-day business functions. 3.2. The Ld. DR fairly submitted that the issue may be restored for fresh adjudication. However, he objected for bank accounts to be released, since the penalty levied is u/s 270A, and entire liability will not get nullified. He thus submitted that, both bank accounts may not be released. We have heard the submissions advanced by both sides in light of the record placed before us. 4. Admittedly, the outstanding demand also includes penalty u/s 270A of the Act. It is noted that, the penalty appeal is not fixed for hearing before this Tribunal. However, the attachment of bank accounts has adversely affected the business operations of the assessee. We, therefore, direct the Revenue to release the attachment of the HDFC Bank Account No. 50200069844496 to enable the assessee to carry out its business activities. The attachment in respect of other bank account/s shall continue, subject to further orders of the Ld.AO in accordance with law. 5. Since the appeal itself has been restored to the file of the Ld. AO, the Stay Application filed by the assessee has become infructuous. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the set- aside proceedings and not to seek unwarranted adjournments. Failure to comply may entitle the AO to proceed in accordance with law. Printed from counselvise.com 4 S.A. No. 27/Mum/2026 In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application stands dismissed as infructuous. Order pronounced in the open court on 20/02/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (GIRISH AGRAWAL) (BEENA PILLAI) Accountant Member Judicial Member Mumbai Dated: 20/02/2026 SC Sr. P.S. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "