PRAKASH REALTY,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 27(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 2533/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Prakash Realty, which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2013-14. The appeal was initially delayed by 376 days, for which the assessee sought condonation, citing advice from counsel and the desire to avoid litigation expenses. The Tribunal, referencing the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Land Acquisition Collector Vs MST Katiji, prioritized substantial justice over technicalities and condoned the delay. The core issue in the appeal was the addition of Rs. 28,79,125 as undisclosed interest income, which the assessee contested. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not been given a proper opportunity to present all relevant documents and evidence before the lower authorities, leading to the decision to remand the case back to the AO.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712187 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Other Referred Cases: Land Acquisition Collector Vs MST Katiji and others
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIRABHADRA S. MAHAJAN
• Assessee Lawyers: RAKESH JOSHI
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence
• Section: 147; 144

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2533/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) Prakash Realty 506-509,5th Floor A wing Shrikant Chambers, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur Mumbai- 400071 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 27(3)(1), Mumbai IT-Office, Vashi Railway Station Building, Navi Mumbai, Navi Mumbai- 400703 PAN/GIR No. AAMFP1688F (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri. Rakesh Joshi Revenue by Shri. Virabhadra S. Mahajan, SR. DR. Date of Hearing 10.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order 12.01.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. There is delay of 376 days in filing present appeal and in this regard an affidavit for seeking condonation of delay Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No.2533/Mum/2025 Prakash Realty has been filed by the assessee, wherein it has been mentioned as under: 1, Jagdish Nand Bijlani, Indian Habitant, Adult, and managing partner of M/s. Prakash Realty, having Office situated at 506- 509, 5th Floor 'A' Wing Shrikant Chambers, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur Mumbai 400071, Maharashtra India do hereby state on solemn affirmation as under: - 1) That, the appellant above named, being aggrieved by the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act 1961, had filed an appeal before Hon'ble CIT(A) on 08.04.2022, relevant to the assessment year 2013-14. 2) The Hon'ble CIT(A), vide order dated 12-01-2024, granted partly relief to the appellant by restricting the addition to the extent of Rs.28,79,125/-. Before the Hon'ble CIT(A), the appellant filed the additional evidence in the form of interest certificate and 26AS showing that during the year under consideration it earned the gross interest income of Rs.28,79,125/- only. The Hon'ble CIT(A) without providing the further opportunity of being heard to the appellant, passed the order by restricting the addition to the extent of Rs.28,79,125/- by treating the gross receipt of the interest as alleged undisclosed income of the appellant without allowing claim of deduction of interest paid and other incidental expenses which was incurred to earned the said income. 3. Though, the appellant was aggrieved by the said CIT(A) order, but could not file the appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT, only in order to buy peace of mind and avoid litigation expenses. Subsequently, the appellant received the penalty order u/s.271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 imposing the penalty on the issue of addition restricted to Rs.28,79,125/- as alleged undisclosed interest income of the appellant. At the time of filing the appeal against the penalty order, the counsel advised him to file an appeal against the Hon'ble CIT(A) order. Taking this advice into consideration, the appellant decided to proceed with the appeal. Hence, there is a delay in filing appeal before Your Honour. Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No.2533/Mum/2025 Prakash Realty 4.Hence, the appellant is making this affidavit in support of its application for condonation of delay in filing of an appeal before Hon'ble Tribunal. What is stated herein above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and I believe the same to be true.. 3. On the other hand Ld. DR refuted the contents contained in the application and requested for dismissal of the same. 4. After having heard the counsel for both the parties on this application for seeking condonation of delay and considering the entire factual position as explained before us and 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 Printed from counselvise.com 4 ITA No.2533/Mum/2025 Prakash Realty we condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits 5. We have heard both the counsel for both the parties and perusal of material available on record and orders passed by the revenue authorities. From the record we notice that addition in the present case were made by the AO on account of the fact that assessee had earned interest income in his bank account but in absence of any details/explanation furnished by the assessee the addition were made. 6. However, during the pendency of appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee had filed application for leading additional evidence the fact of which has been reproduced at para No.4 of the appeal order passed by Ld. CIT(A). However, Ld. CIT(A) didn’t adjudicate the said application for leading a additional evidence. Therefore now during the present appeal before us the assessee has again moved a similar application for leading additional evidence as sufficient opportunity was not provide to the assessee by the AO for producing documents. 7. On the contrary the Ld. DR while relying upon the order passed by the revenue authorities submitted that sufficient and proper opportunities were afforded to the assessee but even inspite of that assessee miserable failed to placed on Printed from counselvise.com 5 ITA No.2533/Mum/2025 Prakash Realty record the supported documents in order to substantiate its claim. 8. Be that has it may in our view the interest of the justice would be made in case the lis between the parties is decided on merits. Therefore without going into the merits of the claim raised by the assessee. The facts still remains that assessee could not placed on record all the documents in order to substantiate its claim. Therefore, keeping in view the said fact we restore the matter back to the file of AO for deciding it afresh after providing opportunity of hearing to the assessee and assessee shall be at liberty to place on record any document in order to support or substantiate its claim. The assessee is burden with cost of Rs. 2000/- which shall be deposit in the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund within 15 days from the date of the receipt of the order and copy of the same shall be placed before the file of AO. Thereafter AO shall proceed to decide the matter has fresh. The assessee shall not seek any adjournment on unnecessary ground and shall remain co-operative during the course of proceedings. 9. Before parting, we make it clear that our decision to restore the matter back to the file of the AO 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. AO independently in accordance with law. Printed from counselvise.com 6 ITA No.2533/Mum/2025 Prakash Realty 10. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24.07.2025 Sd/- Sd/- (PRABHASH SHANKAR) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 24/07/2025 Disha Raut, Stenographer 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 "