RAMKUMAR VENUGOPAL INVESTMENTS PVT LTD,MUMBAI V. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 7047/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Ramkumar Venugopal Investments Pvt. Ltd., which appealed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai, concerning the Assessment Year 2009-10. The primary issue was the tax imposed on a sum of Rs. 66,43,847, which was considered as bogus losses claimed by the assessee due to client code modification. The initial appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-prosecution, attributed to the death of the company's director. The Tribunal, after hearing both parties and considering the affidavit for the delay in filing the appeal, condoned the delay and set aside the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829683 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Mumbai
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 31-10-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ANNAVARAN KOSURI
• Assessee Lawyers: HIMANSHU GANDHI
• Keywords: Set aside; Reasonable cause; Bogus
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “D” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 7047/Mum/2025 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Ramkumar Venugopal Investments Pvt. Ltd., 2nd Floor, Masjid Manore, 16 Homi Modi Street, Fort, Mumbai. PAN : AACCR0534P vs. DCIT, Central Circle-8(1), Room No.656, 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Himanshu Gandhi and Shri Atik Jain For Revenue : Shri Annavaran Kosuri, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 08-01-2026 Date of Pronouncement : 12-01-2026 O R D E R PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-50, Mumbai [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 28-06-2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2009-10. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 60 days in filing the appeal as pointed out by the Registry. After hearing both the parties and perusing the affidavit placed on record, we find that there was reasonable cause for the delay in filing the present appeal and hence, the delay is hereby condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 7047/Mum/2025 3. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dt. 20-12-2016, wherein the AO has brought to tax a sum of Rs. 66,43,847/- on account of bogus losses claimed by the assessee on account of client code modification. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who has since dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution. 4. During the course of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that due to death of the Director of the assessee-company, the matter could not be represented before the Ld.CIT(A) and it was submitted that the assessee be allowed one more opportunity to file the necessary submissions and the matter may accordingly be set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A). 5. The Ld. DR has been heard who has not raised any specific objection where the matter is set-aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A). 6. After hearing both the parties and considering the material available on record and the limited prayer so made by the Ld.AR on behalf of the assessee, the matter is set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the same afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 12-01-2026 Sd/- Sd/- [RAHUL CHAUDHARY] [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 12-01-2026 TNMM Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 7047/Mum/2025 Copy to : 1) The Appellant 2) The Respondent 3) The CIT concerned 4) The D.R, ITAT, Mumbai 5) Guard file By Order Dy./Asst. Registrar I.T.A.T, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "