SUBRAMANIAN V MELLARCODE, MUMBAI V. CIT (A) NFAC, DELHI

ITA 664/MUM/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Subramanian V. Mellarcode, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the CIT (A) NFAC Delhi, which had dismissed his appeal for non-compliance with notices during the appellate proceedings. The original assessment by the A.O. added an amount of Rs.1,02,68,000, invested in immovable property, to the total income of the assessee under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, due to non-submission of any explanation regarding the source of investment. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on merits, as the assessee failed to comply with the notices. The tribunal, considering the circumstances including the non-service of notice during the assessment and the death of the assessee, decided to restore the case to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 130194 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-05-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 09-05-2023
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 05-03-2023
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAHUL PAREKH
• Section: 69; 144

Judgement Text

P a g e | 1 ITA No.664/Mum/2023 Subramanian V. Mellarcode Vs. CIT(A) NFAC IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 664/Mum/2023 (A.Y.2012-13) Subramanian V. Mellarcode C-2604, Tirumala Habitate, Balrajeshwar Road, Mulund West, Mumbai – 400019 Vs. CIT (A) NFAC Delhi स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: ABCPM2751M Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Rahul Parekh Respondent by : Ajay Singh Date of Hearing 10.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement 12.05.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (AM): The present appeal filed by the assesse is directed against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 06.01.2023 for A.Y. 2012-13. 2. Fact in brief is that the A.O has noticed from the NMS module system that assesse has made investment in the immovable property at Rs.1,02,68,000/-. The assessing officer stated that during the course of assessment the assesse has failed to make any submission in spite of notices issued to explain the source of investment made in the immovable property. Therefore, the A.O has completed the assessment ex-parte u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Act and added the total amount of P a g e | 2 ITA No.664/Mum/2023 Subramanian V. Mellarcode Vs. CIT(A) NFAC Rs.1,02,68,000/- invested in the immovable property u/s 69 of the Act to the total income of assesse. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for want of non- compliance to the notices issued during the course of appellate proceedings. 4. During the course of appellate proceedings the ld. Counsel filed paper book and submitted that order u/s 144 of the Act was completed without serving of notices upon the assessee. The ld. Counsel further submitted that during the course of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) the compliance could not be made because the assesse was expired during the course of appellate proceedings. On the other hand, ld. D.R supported the order of the assessing officer. 5. Heard the rival contention and perused the material on record. The ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issue on merit but the appeal was dismissed for want of non-compliance. Regarding not making compliance before the lower authorities, the ld. Counsel submitted that during the course of assessment proceedings before the AO, no notice of hearing was served upon the assessee. Thereafter at the time of appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) the assessee was expired on 18.11.2002 before the completion of appellate proceedings and the ld. CIT(A) has passed the appeal order on 06.01.2023. 6. After considering the above facts and circumstances we have also perused the provision of Sec. 250(6) of the Act which contemplates that the ld. CIT(A) would determine the point in dispute and record reason of such point in support of his conclusion for adjudicating the issue in appeal on merit. However, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal for P a g e | 3 ITA No.664/Mum/2023 Subramanian V. Mellarcode Vs. CIT(A) NFAC want of non-prosecution. Therefore, we restore this case to the file of ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh on merit as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act after giving more opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, the appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on 12.05.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (Kuldip Singh) (Amarjit Singh) Judicial Member Accountant Member Place: Mumbai Date 12.05.2023 Rohit: PS आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यावपि प्रवि //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai.