HARSHVARDHAN MANAGEMENT & CONSULTANTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 10(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1797/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Harshvardhan Management & Consultants Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, contesting an order from the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which dismissed their appeal on the grounds of non-maintainability due to alleged non-filing of return and non-payment of advance tax. The appellant argued that they had indeed filed the return and paid the due taxes, which was supported by documentation. The Tribunal found that the AO and the CIT(A) had not considered the return filed in response to the notice under section 148, leading to the decision to remit the case back to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785849 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HEMANSHU JOSHI
• Assessee Lawyers: ASHOK PATIL
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “E” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1797/Mum/2025 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Harshvardhan Management & Consultants Pvt. Ltd., R.H. 19, Powai Vihar R.H.S. Ltd. Chandivali, Powai, Mumbai-400076. PAN : AABCH9837J vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-10(1)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Ashok Patil For Revenue : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 27-01-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessment in this case was completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟), wherein the AO determined the assessed income at Rs. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1797/Mum/2025 1,59,31,414/-. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. 3. As per the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has not filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act as well as has not paid an amount equivalent to amount of advance tax which was payable and, therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee was held not maintainable in light of section 249(4) and the same was dismissed in limine. Against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) that the assessee has not filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act is factually incorrect and in this regard, our reference was drawn to the assessee‟s Paper Book (Pg.19), wherein the assessee has enclosed a copy of its return of income filed on 31-01-2023 in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. It was submitted that the said fact was also brought to the notice of the AO vide assessee‟s submissions of even date, wherein the assessee has enclosed a copy of the return of income as well as has responded to other queries raised by the AO. It was accordingly submitted that the findings of the Ld.CIT(A) that the assessee has not filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act is not correct. It was further submitted that in view of the same, there is no violation of provisions of section 249(4) of the Act since the assessee has filed return of income and has paid due taxes while filing the return of income. Hence, the appeal is clearly maintainable and, therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee. 5. It was further submitted that even the AO has not taken into cognizance, the return of income so filed by the assessee in response to notice u/s. 148 in spite of the fact that the assessee has duly brought the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1797/Mum/2025 said fact to the notice of the AO as a part of its submissions dt. 31-01- 2023 in response to show cause. It was accordingly submitted that the given the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter may be remitted to the file of the AO for necessary verification and examination as the assessment order has also been passed ex-parte by the assessee, without taking into consideration the return of income filed in response to section 148 of the Act. 6. The Ld. DR is heard, who has not raised any objection where the matter is remitted to the file of the AO. 7. After hearing both the sides and considering the material available on record, we find that the assessee has duly demonstrated that it has filed return of income in response to notice u/s. 148 of the Act. The said return of income has not been taken into consideration either by the AO or by the Ld.CIT(A), which has resulted in dismissal of the appeal by the Ld.CIT(A). Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31-10-2025 Sd/- Sd/- [MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL] [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 31-10-2025 TNMM Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1797/Mum/2025 Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "