MALINI SHANKER,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 28(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2032/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Malini Shanker against an order passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, for the assessment year 2023-24. The primary contention was the alleged negligence or oversight by the CIT(A) in not considering the documents and replies submitted by the assessee, leading to a summary rejection of the appeal. The Tribunal noted the delay in filing the appeal but condoned it, emphasizing the importance of substantial justice over technicalities. The Tribunal also allowed the assessee to raise additional grounds regarding the issuance of notice under section 148 without prior sanction under section 151, which requires factual verification.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711287 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Other Referred Cases: Land Acquisition Collector Vs MST Katiji and others 1987 AIR 1353 Supreme Court
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANNAVARAMKOSURI
• Assessee Lawyers: AJAY R SINGH
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; TDS; Revision of order; FORM 26AS
• Section: 148; 263

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2032/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) Malini Shanker J-125, Sagar Vihar, Sector 8 Vashi, Mumbai – 400703. Vs. ITO, Ward – 28(2)(1) Vshi Stn, Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400703 PAN/GIR No. BJPPS0404M (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ajay R Singh, Adv Revenue by Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. AR Date of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 22.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dt. 27.06.2024 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2023-24. 2. 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 Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2032/Mum/2025 Malini Shanker., Mumbai. 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 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. At the very outset, we noticed that assessee was ex- parte before Ld. CIT(A), however in this regard it was submitted by Ld. AR that all the documents relied upon by the assessee were duly filed before Ld. CIT(A) as well as AO in response to the notice received from the Ld. CIT(A). However, still Ld. CIT(A) had decided the matter without considering the specific replies and documents filed by the assessee. From the records, we noticed that assessee had already filed copy of letter dated 01.07.2019 which was filed before Ld. CIT(A) along with copy of agreement for sale of flat dated 24.09.2010 and copy of assessee’s bank Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2032/Mum/2025 Malini Shanker., Mumbai. statement dated 06.02.2025. Apart from above assessee placed on record the copy of assessee’s husband bank statement, Form -16 of assessee’s husband, copy of housing loan account statement of assessee’s husband, copy of TDS form 26AS in order to demonstrate that these documents were also filed before Ld. CIT(A). However on going through the records, we noticed that Ld. CIT(A) has not taken into consideration the above documents relied upon and filed by the assessee and rejected the appeal summarily without deciding the merits of the same. Which in our view is negligence / over sightedness on the part of Ld. CIT(A). 4. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that there was reasonable cause, because of which assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Hence the Bench is of the view that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to represent his case before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore 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. Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2032/Mum/2025 Malini Shanker., Mumbai. 5. Although Ld. AR has raised his arguments to the effect that the notice u/s 148 of the Act, in the present case was issued without prior sanction granted u/s 151 of the Act. However, in our view this argument required factual verification. Therefore, we allow the assessee to raise this ground also before the revenue authorities which shall be adjudicated on merits by the authorities below. 6. 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. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 22.07.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (GIRISH AGRAWAL) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 22/07/2025 KRK, PS Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.2032/Mum/2025 Malini Shanker., Mumbai. आदेश की \bितिलिप अ\u000eेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. \u000eथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु\u0019 / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु\u0019(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,मु\u0003बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, स\u000eािपत ित //True Copy// 1. उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई मु\u0003बई / ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "