NAZIFA MOHHAMMEDASIM KAMALKHAN,MUMBAI V. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 5(4), MUMBAI

ITA 2738/MUM/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the assessee, Nazifa Mohhammedasim Kamalkhan, against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Mumbai-53, which confirmed an assessed income significantly higher than the returned income for the Assessment Year 2021-22. The primary issues in the appeal included the confirmation of the assessed income, the rejection of the appellant's claim under Section 44ADA, and the addition of unexplained money under Section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee was initially exparte before the CIT(A) due to a communication gap, which led to a decision being made without her effective representation. The Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai, decided to restore the matter back to the CIT(A) to ensure a fair hearing and proper consideration of the assessee's claims.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 668726 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAM KRISHN KEDIA
• Assessee Lawyers: ASADALI MAZGOANWALA
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice
• Section: 2

Judgement Text

" |आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई| IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सुं./ITA No. 2738/MUM/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2021-22) Nazifa Mohhammedasim Kamalkhan J N 2 22 B 7 Sector No. 10, Vashi, New Mumbai- 400703 v/s. बिाम ACIT, CC 5(4), Mumbai Kautalya Bhavan, Mumbai- 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: BNLPD2487D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee by: Mr. Asad Ali Mazgoanwala राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia स िवाई की िारीख / Date of Hearing 17.06.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date of Pronouncement 24.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER SANDEEP GOSAIN [J.M.]:- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Mumbai-53 [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 29.03.2025 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2021-22. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the assessed income at Rs. 9,02,540/- as against the returned income at Rs.4,52,562/- P a g e | 2 ITA No. 2738/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2021-22 Nazifa Mohhammedasim Kamalkhan 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the order without granting sufficient and opportunity without considering the adjournment application of the appellant and hence, his order is in violation of the principle of natural justice. 3. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, 9. as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the rejection of the appellant's claim of income amounting to ₹4,52,562 under Section 44ADA and in confirming the addition of ₹9,02,542 made by the AO under Section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act as unexplained money.\" 3. At the very outset, I notice that the assessee was exparte before the Ld. CIT(A), and in this regard, Ld. AR submitted that the absence of the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) was unintentional as there was a communication gap between the assessee and her representative. Therefore, because of this, the assessee could not put effective representation before the Ld. CIT(A). The said fact placed by the assessee has been contested strongly by the Ld. DR. 4. Be that as it may, in my view, the interest of justice could be met in case the assessee is provided one more opportunity of hearing. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts of the present case, the matter is restored back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for deciding it afresh on merits by providing one more opportunity of hearing to the parties. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on frivolous grounds and shall remain cooperative during the course of the proceedings. 5. Before parting, I make it clear that the decision to restore the matter back to file Ld. CIT(A) shall in no way be construed as having any reflection or P a g e | 3 ITA No. 2738/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2021-22 Nazifa Mohhammedasim Kamalkhan expression on the merits of the dispute, which shall be adjudicated by Ld. CIT(A) independently in accordance with law. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.06.2025. Sd/- Sd/- SANDEEP GOSAIN (न्यानयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER) Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai दिन ुंक /Date 24.06.2025 अननक ेत स ुंह र जपूत/ स्टेनो आदेश की प्रनतनलनि अग्रेनित/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file. सत्यानित प्रनत //True Copy// आदेशािुसार/ BY ORDER, सहायक िंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अिीलीय अनर्करण/ ITAT, Bench, Mumbai. "