DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4(2)(1), MUMBAI V. PARSOLI CORPORATION LTD., MUMBAI

ITA 7466/MUM/2017

AI Insights

The case involves cross appeals and a cross objection related to the assessment year 2007-08, filed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT) and M/s. Parsoli Corporation Ltd. against the order of the CIT(A)-9, Mumbai dated 4.10.2017. The appeals were heard ex-parte due to the non-appearance of the assessee despite multiple adjournments. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not provided proper reasoning in his decision and thus remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination of all issues.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 123955 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 02-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 28-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Set aside

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI ‘C’ BENCH, MUMBAI. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) I.T.A. No. 7466/Mum/2017 (A.Y. 2007-08) The DCIT-4(2)(1) Room No. 642 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road Mumbai-40 020. V s . M/s. Parsoli Corporation Ltd. B/6, Shalimar Complex Paldi, Ahmadabad-380007. PAN : AABCP9030F (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O. No. 34/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2007-08) I.T.A. No. 243/Mum/2018 (A.Y. 2007-08) M/s. Parsoli Corporation Ltd. B/6, Shalimar Complex Paldi, Ahmadabad-380007. PAN : AABCP9030F V s. The DCIT-4(2)(1) Room No. 642 Aayakar Bhavan M.K. Road Mumbai-40 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Department by Shri K.C. Selvamani D ate of He a rin g 03.01.2023 D ate of P r on ou nc em ent 03.01.2023 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The cross appeals filed by the parties and the cross objection filed by the assessee are directed against the order dated 4.10.2017 passed by the learned CIT(A)-9, Mumbai and they relate to A.Y. 2007-08. 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee even though adjournment was granted on several occasions at the specific request of the assessee. We noticed that the last opportunity was given to the assessee on 8.12.2022, still assessee did not turn up before the Tribunal. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeals ex-parte, without presence of the assessee. M/s. Parsoli Corporation Ltd. 2 3. We have heard learned DR and perused the record. We noticed that the learned CIT(A), after recording the submissions of the assessee, has passed the order without giving proper reasoning in support of his decision. Accordingly, we are of the view that all the issues require fresh examination at the end of the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, we set aside all the issues to his file for examining them afresh and for passing a reasoned order. Accordingly all the issues urged by the assessee in its appeal and cross objection and all the issues urged by the Revenue in its appeal are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudicating them afresh. After affording adequate opportunity of being heard, the learned CIT(A) may take appropriate decision in accordance with law. 4. In the result, the appeal and cross objection filed by the assessee as well as appeal filed by the Revenue are treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on 03.01.2023 Sd/- Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (B.R. BASAKARAN) Judicial Member Accountant Member Mumbai; Dated : 03/01/2023 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) PS ITAT, Mumbai