MOHD SAJID MOHD MAZAHIR SHAIKH,MUMBAI V. NFAC, DELHI, MUMBAI

MA 117/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mohd. Sajid Mohd. Mazahir Shaikh, who did not file his income tax return for the assessment year 2014-15. The Assessing Officer reopened his case due to a significant cash deposit in his bank account, which the assessee claimed was without his knowledge. The subsequent assessments and appeals at various levels upheld the additions made to his income, primarily due to his non-compliance and lack of documentary evidence. The Tribunal initially dismissed his appeal ex parte due to similar reasons. The current miscellaneous application was filed to recall this order, citing 'sufficient cause' for his previous non-compliance, which the Tribunal accepted, allowing a recall of the order to ensure fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 633343 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANNAVARAMKOSURI
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 147; 148

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI. OM PRAKASH KANT, AM AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JM MA No. 117/Mum/2025 (Arising out of ITA No. 2231/Mum/2024) (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Mohd. Sajid Mohd. Mazahir Shaikh 65, Lala Nigam Road, Colaba, Mumbai – 400005. Vs. NFAC, Delhi PAN/GIR No. DMOPS0477Q (Applicant) : (Respondent) Applicant by : Mr. Mohd. Sajid, (A’s in person) Respondent by : Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 06.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 09.06.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: The present Miscellaneous Application has been filed by the assessee/applicant u/s. 254(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act' for short), for recall of the ex parte order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 2231/Mum/2024, dated 30.10.2024. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed his return of income for the year under consideration. The learned Assessing Officer (ld. A.O. for short) reopened the assessee’s case vide notice u/s. 148 of the Act dated 19.03.2021 for the reason that cash deposit of Rs.1,55,62,000/- was made in the assessee’s saving bank account maintained with Sahebrao Deshmukh Co-operative Bank Ltd. The ld. A.O. sought for details pertaining to the said transaction for which the assessee vide written submission 2 MA No. 117/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) Mohd. Sajid Mohd. Mazahir Shaikh stated that the assessee was pursuing his studies and was doing article-ship training for CA course for which the assessee has received only Rs.24,000/- as stipend from the CA firm in which he was pursuing his article-ship training. The assessee in response to the notice u/s. 148 of the Act filed his return of income, declaring the same. The assessee contended that the impugned transaction in his bank account was done without his knowledge, for which he is said to have filed compliant before the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai. The ld. A.O. then passed the assessment order u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 30.03.2024, being the best judgment assessment, for the reason that the assessee has not furnished any documentary evidence to support his contention, except a written submission, thereby making an addition of Rs.1,55,60,000/- u/s. 69A of the Act and towards the interest income of Rs.19,153/- for the above transaction. 3. Aggrieved the assessee was in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who vide an ex parte order dated 19.02.2024 upheld the addition made by the ld. A.O. for the reason that inspite of several opportunity the assessee has failed to substantiate his claim and has been non-compliant throughout the appellate proceedings. 4. The assessee was in appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide an ex parte order dated 30.10.2024 had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee has failed to produce any documentary evidences and had consistently been non-compliant before the lower authorities. The applicant/assessee has filed the present miscellaneous application for recall of the impugned order of the Tribunal on the ground that the assessee/applicant had ‘sufficient cause’ for non-compliance before the Tribunal on the date of hearing. 3 MA No. 117/Mum/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) Mohd. Sajid Mohd. Mazahir Shaikh 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. As there was no representation on behalf of the assessee, the Tribunal vide order dated 30.20.2024 passed an ex parte order dismissing the assessee’s appeal. The assessee contended that there was reasonable cause for non-compliance and prayed that the order of the Tribunal be recalled. 6. Upon perusal of the same, we deem it fit to recall the order of the Tribunal dated 30.10.2024, in order to provide the assessee with one more opportunity to present his case before the Tribunal by adhering to the principles of natural justice and also in the interest of justice dispensation. 7. We have not expressed any view on the merits of the case and the same needs to be adjudicated afresh by the Tribunal. 8. In the result, the miscellaneous application filed by the assessee/applicant is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 09.06.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (OM PRAKASH KANT) (KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated:09.06.2025 Karishma J. Pawar (Stenographer) Copy of the Order forwarded to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. CIT- concerned 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard File BY ORDER, (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai "