MRS VARSHA KAUSHIK SHAH, MUMBAI V. ACIT WARD 15(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2304/MUM/2023

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6439 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 26-09-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 25-06-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: UJJAWAL KUMAR CHAVAN
• Assessee Lawyers: SIMONI CHOUHANRASHMI
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Set aside
• Section: 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, AM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2304/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Mrs. Varsha Kaushik Shah 5, Bhaveshwar Vihar II, 383, S. V. P Road, Mumbai- 400004. बिधम/ Vs. ACIT, Ward 15(1) Room No.451/480, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400020. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AVZPS7401F (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 27/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement: 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee company against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/(NFAC), Delhi dated 27.04.2023 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee Ms. Simoni Chouhan submitted that the impugned order of the Ld. NFAC is an ex-parte order without hearing the assessee. According to her, the AO had passed the assessment order on 07.03.2014 and the assessee had filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) (during the physical regime) and the assessee had filed the additional evidences before the Ld. CIT(A) who had called for the remand report from the AO which was evident from Assessee by: Ms. Simoni Chouhan/Rashmi Vyas Revenue by: Shri Ujjawal Kumar Chavan (Sr. AR) ITA No.2304/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2011-12 Mrs. Varsha Kaushik Shah 2 the fact that AO in-turn had sought from assessee certain relevant documents in the remand proceedings. According to the Ld. AR, thereafter, the appeal of the assessee got migrated to the faceless regime on 12.02.2021. And thereafter, the assessee did not receive any notices from the Ld. NFAC. According to her, even though the Ld. NFAC has mentioned about the issuance of five (5) notices, she said that the assessee never received any notices of hearing. In this regard, it is noted that even though Ld.NFAC states to have issued five notices, but there is no assertion on the part of Ld.NFAC that the assessee have been served the notices. According to assessee, due to technical glitches, the notices might not have been served upon the assessee. According to the Ld. AR, even if it is assumed that the assessee was served the copy of notice but did not appear before the Ld.CIT(A), the appeal was required to be disposed off on merits as already ordered by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra HUF reported in (2017) 291 CTR 614 (Bom.), Moreover, it was brought to our notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has not passed the impugned order in accordance to sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”). i.e. Ld.NFAC has not decided the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in accordance to section 250 (b) of the Act. In such a factual back drop, we are of the considered view that the assessee ought to have been heard before the passing impugned order and decide the grounds of appeal in accordance to sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal restored back ITA No.2304/Mum/2023 A.Y. 2011-12 Mrs. Varsha Kaushik Shah 3 to the file of the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC with a direction to adjudicate the grounds of appeal in accordance to sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Act. The Ld. AR/assessee is directed to file relevant documents/written submissions to support the grounds of appeal raised before the First Appellate Authority and may request for hearing in accordance to Rules if assessee desires. And the Ld. CIT(A) to pass the order in accordance to law after hearing the assessee. 3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 17/10/2023. Sd/- Sd/- (AMARJIT SINGH) (ABY T. VARKEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; दिनांक Dated : 17/10/2023. Vijay Pal Singh, (Sr. PS) आदेश की प्रनिनलनि अग्रेनर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. दवभागीय प्रदतदनदि, आयकर अपीलीय अदिकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER, सत्यादपत प्रदत //True Copy// उि/सहधयक िंजीकधर /(Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीलीय अनर्करण, मुंबई / ITAT, Mumbai