ZUBBIN KHMBATTA, MUMBAI V. The Income Tax Officer Ward 20(3)(1), Piramal Chamber, Mumbai

ITA 2274/MUM/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5583 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 21-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 28-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “G” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.Nos.2274 & 2271/Mum./2024 Assessment Years 2015-2016 & 2017-2018 Zubbin Khambatta, H-2, Navroze Baug, Lalbaug, Mumbai–400012. Maharashtra. PAN AEWPK3442G vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-20(3)(1), Piramal Chamber, Lal Baug, Lower Parel, Mumbai – 400 013 Maharashtra. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Sumit Mantri For Revenue : Shri Dr Kishor Dhule, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 22.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA.Nos.2274 and 2271/Mum./2014 for assessment years 2015-2016 and 2017-2018, arise against the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi’s as many DIN & order nos. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1062116113(1) and 1062116837(1), 2 ITA.Nos.2274 & 2271/MUM./2024 dated 06.03.2024, in proceedings u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)-NFAC’s identical lower appellate findings; upholding the Assessing Officer’s action inter alia making sec.69C unexplained expenditure addition of Rs.1,69,02,856/- and Rs.3,45,10,679/- assessment year- wise, respectively; is ex-parte; and that too without ensuring compliance to sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with this situation, we reject the Revenue’s vehement contentions and deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant twin appeals back to the CIT(A)-NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly. 3 ITA.Nos.2274 & 2271/MUM./2024 5. These assessee’s twin appeals ITA.Nos.2274 & 2271/Mum./2014 are allowed for statistical purposes in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open Court on 26.07.2024 Sd/- Sd/- [OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 26 th July, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Mumbai concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “G” Bench, Mumbai. 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai.