PRASHUL REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD 13(1)(1), MUMBAI CITY

ITA 2634/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Prashul Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) concerning the Assessment Year 2018-19. The appeal was initially dismissed ex-parte as the company had entered liquidation and an Insolvency Resolution Professional was appointed. The Tribunal considered the circumstances of the company's liquidation and the lack of representation at the CIT(A) level due to the appointment of the IRP. The Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remand the case for a fresh hearing, allowing the IRP to present the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 706158 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.A. DHYANI
• Assessee Lawyers: MARGAV SHUKLA
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; Additional evidence; Unexplained cash credit; Notional interest; Liquidation

Judgement Text

" |आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई| IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. RENU JAUHRI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सुं./ITA No. 2634/MUM/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2018-19) Prashul Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 2nd Floor, Gita Building, Next to HP Petrol Pump, Near Sion Circle, Sion (East), Maharashtra- 400022 v/s. बिाम ITO-ward 13(1)(1) Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, New Marine Lines, Churchgate, Maharashtra- 400020 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No: AAICP3419M Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवादी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee by: Shri Margav Shukla & Shri Shubham Shah राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Mr. R. A. Dhyani स िवाई की िारीख / Date of Hearing 26.06.2025 घोर्णा की िारीख/Date of Pronouncement 30.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER RENU JAUHRI [A.M.] :- This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Mumbai/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated 20.09.2024 passed u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as “Act”] for Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2018-19. P a g e | 2 ITA No. 2634/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Prashul Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. On given facts, circumstances and judicial pronouncements Ld. CIT Appeals proceeded to pass an ex-parte appellate order. Such ex-parte order passed is bad in facts and in law and liable to be set-aside to the file of Assessing Officer. 2. On the given facts circumstances and judicial pronouncements Commissioner of Ld. Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition on account of unexplained Cash credits under section 68. Such addition made is bad in facts and in law and liable to be deleted. 3. Without prejudice to the above, On the given facts circumstances and judicial pronouncements Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition on account of unexplained Cash credits under section 68. Such addition made is excessive in facts and in law and liable to be reduced. 4. On the given facts circumstances and judicial pronouncements Commissioner of Income Ld. Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition on account of Notional Interest as undisclosed income on advance given to joint venture. Such addition made is bad in facts and in law and liable to be deleted. 5. Without prejudice to the above, On the given facts circumstances and judicial pronouncements Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the addition on account of Notional Interest as undisclosed income on advance given to joint venture. Such addition made is excessive in facts and in law and liable to be reduced. 6. On the given facts circumstances and judicial pronouncements Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance on account of expenses which are incurred by the appellant company during the F.Y. 2017-18. Such disallowance made is bad in facts and in law and liable to be deleted. 7. Without prejudice to the above, On the given facts circumstances and judicial pronouncements Commissioner of Income Ld. Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance on account of expenses which are incurred by the appellant company during the F.Y. 2017-18 and are incurred in the normal course of Business. Such disallowance made is excessive in facts and in law and liable to be reduced.” 3. At the outset, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee company has gone into liquidation, and an Insolvency Resolution Professional [IRP] has been appointed by the National Company Law Tribunal [NCLT] vide order dated 04.07.2024. The impugned appeal was filed by the erstwhile promoters prior to the appointment of the IRP. Hence, no compliance was made before the Ld. CIT(A), as a result of which, the appeal was dismissed exparte vide order dated 20.09.2024. He has also drawn our attention to the application dated P a g e | 3 ITA No. 2634/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Prashul Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 29.05.2025 filed before the Tribunal for admission of additional evidence, wherein copies of the appointment letter as well as intimation to the Income Tax Department regarding the same via email dated 12.06.2024 have been filed. He has also placed on record a copy of the Form B (claim form from the Income Tax Department) filed on 20.08.2024. 4. In view of the above factual position, Ld. AR requested that the matter may be restored back so that proper representation can be made before the Ld. CIT(A). Ld. DR has not objected to the above-stated proposition. 5. After hearing the rival submissions and perusal of the documents placed on record, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) with directions to pass a fresh order after giving due opportunity of being heard to the IRP. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.06.2025. Sd/- Sd/- BEENA PILLAI RENU JAUHRI (न्यानयक सदस्य/JUDICIAL MEMBER) (लेखाकार सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Place: म ुंबई/Mumbai दिन ुंक /Date 30.06.2025 अननक ेत स ुंह र जपूत/ स्टेनो आदेश की प्रनतनलनि अग्रेनित/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant P a g e | 4 ITA No. 2634/Mum/2025 A.Y. 2018-19 Prashul Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 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. "