KARGWAL ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 10(1)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4052/MUM/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Kargwal Enterprises Pvt Ltd, which faced an assessment under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, concerning a share premium amount of Rs.1.8 crores received in the impugned financial year. The assessment was reopened under section 148, and during the proceedings, the share premium was verified and found to be from four companies, amounting to Rs.1.06 crore. The assessee could not prove the identity and creditworthiness of these companies, leading to the addition of the amount under section 68. The assessee's appeal to the Ld.CIT(A) was initially dismissed due to delay, which the court later found to be satisfactorily explained, leading to the remittance of the case for fresh adjudication.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706130 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Laws Referred To: section 143(3), section 147, section 148, section 131, section 68
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: ISSUING
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 147; 148; 143(3); 68; 131

Judgement Text

"2 ITA 4052/Jodh/2024 Kargwal Enterprises Pvt Ltd 10(1)(2), Mumbai [in short, the “Ld. AO”] passed under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Act, date of order 22/02/2016. 2. When the appeal was called up for hearing, none was present on behalf of the assesse. On a perusal of the record, we find that the case was fixed for hearing on 24/04/2025 and by the written request of the representative of the assesse, the case was adjourned on 26/06/2025 and both the parties were informed accordingly. But when the matter was called up for hearing on 26/06/2025, no one appeared on behalf of the assessee even no adjournment petition was filed. Considering the merit of the case, we proceed to dispose the matter in exparte qua for assessee after hearing the Ld. DR. 3. We heard the submission of the Ld.DR and considered the documents available on the record. The assessee’s case was reopened under section 148 of the Act in relation to receiving of share premium amount of Rs.1.8 crores in impugned financial year. During the assessment proceedings, the Ld.AO concluded the assessment and verified the share premium received by the assessee by issuing the share in premium. The Ld.AO issued the notice under section 131 of the Act to the four share holding companies which were remained unserved. The assessee received share premium from the alleged 4 companies amount to Rs.1.06 crore. As the assessee was unable to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the said share subscribers, the alleged amount was added back under section 68 of the Act with the total income of the assesse. The aggrieved assesse filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) with a delay. The Ld.CIT(A) rejected the condonation petition and eventually dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in the point of limitation. 4 ITA 4052/Jodh/2024 Kargwal Enterprises Pvt Ltd 6. In our considered view, we find that the assessee has satisfactorily explained the delay in filing the appeal and has admitted that the appeal was initially filed manually before the Ld. CIT(A). Upon receipt of the assessment order within the prescribed time, the assessee proceeded to file the appeal in physical form. However, the assessee was unaware of the change in the procedure mandating online filing. Subsequently, upon becoming aware of the requirement, the assessee filed the appeal electronically. It is pertinent to note that the system of online filing of appeals was newly introduced in Assessment Year 2013–14, and the assessee’s ignorance of the same appears to be bona fide. The initial step of filing the appeal manually, immediately after receipt of the assessment order, indicates the assessee’s intention to pursue the matter diligently. Upon gaining knowledge of the correct procedure, the assessee promptly complied by filing the appeal online. Considering the facts and circumstances, we are of the opinion that there exists sufficient cause for the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we direct that the delay be condoned and remit the matter to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the appeal de novo. We refrain from expressing any opinion on the merits of the case so as not to prejudice the decision of the Ld. CIT(A). Needless to state, the assessee shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of being heard during the remanded proceedings. The assessee is also directed to cooperate diligently with the Ld. CIT(A) to ensure expeditious disposal of the appeal. "