JITENDRA PUKHRAJ JAIN ,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 18(1)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 1275/MUM/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Jitendra Pukhraj Jain against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, which sustained the action of the Assessing Officer (AO) in taxing an amount of Rs. 62,53,379 under section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and disallowing a loss of Rs. 5,82,234 claimed by the assessee. The assessee argued that the CIT(A) did not adequately consider the detailed submissions and evidence provided during the appellate proceedings, leading to a miscarriage of justice. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had not properly considered the submissions made during the appellate proceedings and thus remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712675 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KAVEETA PUNIT KAUSHIK
• Assessee Lawyers: RADHA HALBE
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 144; 69C

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “F” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1275/Mum/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Jitendra Pukhraj Jain, 5A, First Floor, Mezzanine, Old Oriental Bldg, 65, M.G. Road, Flora Fountain, Mumbai. PAN : AABPJ9486E vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-18(1)(5), 206, Earnest House, Nariman Point, Mumbai. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Ms. Radha Halbe For Revenue : Ms. Kaveeta Punit Kaushik Date of Hearing : 23-07-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30-07-2025 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 06-12-2024, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16, wherein the Ld.CIT(A) has sustained the action of the AO, wherein an amount of Rs. 62,53,379/- was brought to tax, invoking the provisions of section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟) as well as an amount of Rs. 5,82,234/- being loss claimed by the assessee was disallowed. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 1275/Mum/2025 2. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee has filed a detailed Paper Book (comprising of 300 pages approximately) before the Ld.CIT(A) on 16-11-2024, containing necessary submissions, evidences in support of the grounds of appeal so taken by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). However, the Ld.CIT(A) without duly appreciating the same, has proceeded and uphold the order so passed by the AO. It was accordingly submitted that the impugned order has been passed in total disregard to the detailed submissions made by the assessee with no meaningful reference or consideration, resulting in miscarriage of justice. It was further submitted that since the original assessment was also completed u/s. 144 of the Act and all the relevant documentation have already been placed by the assessee, in the interest of justice and fair play; the matter may be remitted to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. 3. Per contra, the Ld. DR has been heard, who has relied on the orders passed by the AO as well as that of the Ld.CIT(A). 4. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. From the perusal of the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A), we find that the ld CIT(A) has acknowledged the fact that the assessee has filed and uploaded the submissions during the appellate proceedings. However, given the fact that the submissions could not be made before the AO, the Ld.CIT(A) has summarily confirmed the findings of the AO without taking into consideration the submissions and documentation so filed by the assessee during the appellate proceedings. 5. In our considered opinion where the assessment has been completed u/s. 144 and the assessee seeks to avail the necessary opportunity before the Ld.CIT(A) and seeks to file the documentation in support of the claim so made in the return of income or contesting the addition so made by the AO, the evidences so submitted should have been considered in proper Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 1275/Mum/2025 perspective after taking into consideration the reasons which prevented the assessee from filing the same during the course of assessment proceedings and where required, a remand report could have been called from the AO. However, in the instant case, we find that no such action has been undertaken by the Ld.CIT(A). Further, there is no finding which has been recorded on merits of the case. 6. In light of the fact that all the necessary evidences which the assessee seeks to file have already been filed and placed on record, we deem it appropriate that the matter be remitted to the file of the ld CIT(A) to examine the same and decide on the admissibility of the additional evidences and on the merits of the matter as per law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30-07-2025 Sd/- Sd/- [MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL] [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 30-07-2025 TNMM Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 1275/Mum/2025 Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "