PRASHANT KISHOR MEHTA, MUMBAI V. DCIT, CC-2(1), MUMBAI

ITA 1997/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Shri Prashant Kishor Mehta, who appealed against the order dated 22/09/2022 passed by CIT(A)-48, Mumbai, concerning the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the exparte order and an addition of Rs.1,76,11,000 to his income, attributed to unexplained cash deposits in his bank account. The assessee argued that he was unaware of the proceedings and the exparte order due to health issues and miscommunication through his Chartered Accountant. The Departmental Representative did not object to the remand of the case for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 302288 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 10-10-2023
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 73

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘C‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.1997/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year :2017-18) Shri Prashant Kishor Mehta 9, Diamond House Vacha Gandhi Road Gamdevi Mumbai Maharashtra-400007 Vs. DCIT, CC-2(1) Mumbai PAN/GIR No.AACPM2532M (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ram Kumar Pugaliya Revenue by Shri H.M. Bhatt Date of Hearing 11/10/2023 Date of Pronouncement 18/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 22/09/2022 passed by CIT(A)-48, Mumbai for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.143(3)/147 for the A.Y.2017-18. 2. In various grounds of appeal assessee has challenged the exparte order passed by ld. CIT(A) and addition of Rs.1,76,11,000/- on account of cash deposits in the bank account. Before us ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ITA No.1997/Mum/2023 Shri Prashant Kishor Mehta 2 assessee could not attend the notice of hearing sent through e- mail and ITB portal, because the case was being handled by Chartered Accountant who did not inform the assessee nor represented the matter as the e-mail ID and mobile number provided in the portal was of the AR/ Chartered Accountant. Thus, assessee was not aware of any proceedings or even the passing of the exparte order by the ld. CIT(A) and that is the reason why he came to the knowledge of order dated 22/09/2022 only on 14/04/2023. He further submitted that assessee was 73 years old and was infected with Covid-19 infection three times during the year 2021-22 and thereafter, he suffered prolonged illness and in support, copy of his medical report and certificates have also been filed before us. Apart from that, assessee being a very senior citizen was not aware of NFAC proceedings. Under these circumstances, he requested that matter should be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to be decided afresh after giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 3. Ld. DR also did not have any objection if the matter is remanded back to the ld. CIT (A) for adjudicating it on merits. 4. After considering the facts and material brought on record, we find that the ld. CIT(A) have noted that certain notices were sent to the assessee, however, no communication was received from the assessee. Accordingly, he has passed an exparte order on merits confirming the addition made by the ld. AO. Before us, the ld. Counsel have explained that firstly, assessee was going ITA No.1997/Mum/2023 Shri Prashant Kishor Mehta 3 through huge medical problems as he suffered Covid infection three times and thereafter, very prolonged illness and was under medical cure for long time, in support of which medical reports and certificates have been filed. Apart from that e-mail ID and mobile number was provided in the portal belonged to the authorised representative / Chartered Accountant who did not attend the proceedings nor informed the assessee about any such communication by the department. So much so, even the appellate order was not communicated to the assessee. Under these circumstances and in the interest of justice, we are of the opinion that matter should be restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue of cash deposits afresh and in accordance with law after giving due opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to update his email ID and information in the ITB portal for proper communication of the notices and to comply in the appellate proceedings to substantiate his case. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 18 th October, 2023. Sd/- (PADMAVATHY S) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 18/10/2023 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : ITA No.1997/Mum/2023 Shri Prashant Kishor Mehta 4 BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. //True Copy//