NARAN PARMA MANODARA,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 3(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7820/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by the assessee, Naran Parma Manodara, against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Raipur, for the assessment year 2017-18. The primary contention was the dismissal of the appeal by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NaFAC) and the subsequent handling by the JCIT(A), Raipur, which the assessee argued violated principles of natural justice by not issuing a notice under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after the case transfer. Additionally, the assessee challenged the additions made under section 69A of the Act, arguing that the amounts were already recorded in the books of accounts, thus not warranting the application of section 69A.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 846275 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Mumbai
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 26-11-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHIR HARENDRA VERMA
• Assessee Lawyers: NILESH KARIA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & HON’BLE SHRI PRABHASH SHANKER, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 7820/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) Naran Parma Manodara Unit No. 214, Ganatra Industrial Estate, Cadbury Junction , Khopat, Thane - 400602 Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1), Thane Room No.3, 6th Floor, Ashar IT Park, Road No. 16Z, Wagle Estate, Thane (W) 400604 PAN/GIR No. AKSPM4204C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Nilesh Karia Revenue by Shir Harendra Verma, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 19.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 23.03.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 19.09.2025 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/JCIT (A), Raipur for the assessment year 2017-18. The following grounds are reproduced below: Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 7820/Mum/2025 “The following grounds are taken without prejudice to each other - On facts and circumstance of the case and in law, 1. The Learned National Faceless Appeal Centre (Ld. NaFAC) has erred in dismissing the appeal to be devoid of merits and confirming the addition due to non-responsive of the appellant during the Appellate proceedings. 2. That the Ld. JCIT(A), Raipur has erred in not issuing notice u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act') after transfer of case from NFAC to JCIT(A) thereby violated the principles of natural justice by failing to provide a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 3. Without prejudice to the above, that whether Learned Assessing Officer (Ld. AO) was right in making addition u/s 69A of the Act without rejecting the books of accounts u/s 145(3) of the Act as the amount of alleged addition was duly recorded in the books of accounts? 4. Without prejudice to the above, that whether Ld. AO and Ld. JCIT(A) erred in misinterpreting the provisions of section 69A which provides that \"the assessee is found to be owner of the money and such money is not recorded in the books of account and the assessee either offers no explanation about nature and source thereof or the explanation offered is not satisfactory in the opinon of the Assessing Officer, the money may be deemed to be the income eof the assessee for such year\". The Appellant has already recorded the money in the books of account, which clearly violates the invoking of the provisions of section 69A of the Act, thereby the order of Assessing Officer is liable to be set aside. 5. The Appellant prays to allow it to add, alter, amend, modify and/or delete any or all of the above grounds of appeal. ” 2. At the very outset we noticed that assessee was ex-parte before Ld. CIT(A) and consequently, considering the documents Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 7820/Mum/2025 placed on record, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal. 3. Be that as it may, without going into the merits of the issues raised by the assessee and considering the fact that the assessee could not put effective representation before Ld. CIT(A). Therefore, considering the interest of justice, 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 set aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for deciding the same afresh by providing adequate opportunity of hearing, subject to cost of Rs. 2,000/- imposed upon the assessee which shall be deposited in the Prime Minister Relief Fund and a copy of the receipt shall be placed on the file before Ld. CIT(A) within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 4. Before parting, we want to make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of 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 CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 5. Needless to mention that Ld. CIT(A) shall provide adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall not Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No. 7820/Mum/2025 seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of proceedings. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 23.03.2026 Sd/- Sd/- (PRABHASH SHANKER) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 23/03/2026 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. संबंधित आयकर आयुक्त / The CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / Concerned CIT 5. धिभागीय प्रधतधिधि, आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,मुम्बई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/BY ORDER, सत्याधपत प्रधत //True Copy// उि/सहायक िंजीकार ( Asst. Registrar) आयकर अिीिीय अतिकरण, मुम्बई / ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "