KAMBARE CHEMICALS (I) PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2785/MUM/2025

AI Insights

Kambare Chemicals (I) Pvt Ltd filed appeals against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16. The appeals were consolidated due to the common issues involved. The ITAT noted the absence of the assessee's representation and the delay in filing the appeals. However, citing the principles of substantial justice over technicalities, the ITAT condoned the delay and admitted the appeals for hearing on merits. The case was decided ex-parte due to the non-appearance of the assessee, and the ITAT found that the assessee had not been given an effective opportunity to represent their case before the CIT(A). Consequently, the ITAT restored the matter to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, emphasizing that the decision should not be construed as an expression on the merits of the dispute.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712193 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Other Referred Cases: Land Acquisition Collector Vs MST Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353 Supreme Court
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM KRISHN KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: LETTER FILE DT...

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No.2784 & 2785/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15& 2015-16 KambareChemicals (I) Pvt Ltd. Shop NO. C, Jawahar Mansion, FansaWadi, Thakurdwar Road, Mumbai 400002 PAN: AABCK0905A Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 4(2)(1), Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Letter File dt. 16.06.2025 Respondent by Shri. Ram Krishn Kedia (SR. DR) Date of Hearing 18.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challenging the different impugned orders dated 18.05.2023 & 12.06.2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi for assessment year 2014-15 & 2015-16. 2. Since all the issues involved in these two appeals are common and identical, therefore, they have been clubbed, heard together and consolidated order is being passed for Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 2784 & 2785/Mum/2025 AY 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kambare Chemicals (I) Pvt. Ltd. the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take ITA No. 2784/Mum/2025, A.Y 2014-15 as lead case and facts narrated therein. ITA No. 2784/Mum/2025, A.Y 2014-15 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called, however an application for seeking adjournment has been placed on record. From the case records, we noticed that the assessee was ex-parte before Ld. CIT(A) therefore we dismiss the application for seeking adjournment. Contra, Ld. DR present in the court is ready with the arguments. Therefore, we have decided to proceed with the hearing of the case ex-parte. 3. From the records we noticed that there is delay in filing the present appeal, therefore after going through the contents of the application and also hearing Ld. DR and considering the entire factual position as noticed by us and also keeping in view the principles laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs MST Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353 Supreme Court, wherein it has been held that were substantial justice is pitted against technicalities of non- deliberate delay, then in that eventuality substantial justice is to be preferred. In our view the principals of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Hence considering the explanation put forth by the Assessee by justifiably and properly explaining the delay which occurred in filing the appeal and construing the Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 2784 & 2785/Mum/2025 AY 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kambare Chemicals (I) Pvt. Ltd. expression \"sufficient cause\" liberally we are inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal before us. Therefore, we condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 3. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee we are of the view that since the assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Hence, considering the overall circumstances of the present case, we deem it proper to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the appeal afresh by providing one more opportunity to the assessee. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 4. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 2785/Mum/2025 AY 2015-16 6. as the facts and circumstances in this appeal are identical to ITA No. 2784/Mum/2025for the AY 2014-15 (except Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 2784 & 2785/Mum/2025 AY 2014-15 & 2015-16 Kambare Chemicals (I) Pvt. Ltd. variance in figures) would apply ‘mutatis mutandis’ for this appeal also. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose. 7. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/07/2025 Sd/- Sd/- Sd/-Sd/- (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Mumbai: Dated: 24/07/2025 Divya R. Nandgaonkar Stenographer Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "