ROHIT AMRITLAL KAPADIA,MUMBAI V. DY CIT CIRCLE 16(3), MUMBAI

MA 334/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves a miscellaneous petition by the assessee, Rohit Amritlal Kapadia, against an order that remitted his appeal to the CIT(A) instead of the AO. The Revenue argued that the appeal should have been remitted to the AO for further verification, claiming the initial order was a mistake apparent on record. The Tribunal, however, found that their decision to remit the appeal to the CIT(A) was a considered decision based on the facts of the case and within the powers granted to the CIT(A) under the statute. The Tribunal dismissed the miscellaneous petition, emphasizing that it did not constitute a review of their earlier decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 829489 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 13-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Mumbai
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2025
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KRISHAN KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: POOJA JAIN

Judgement Text

"1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. No. 334/Mum/2025 Arising Out of I.T.A. No. 5541/Mum/2025 A.Y: 2018-19 Rohit Amritlal Kapadia, 102-B, Paradise Apartments, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-400006. PAN – AABPK0215A Vs DCIT Circle 16(3), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Ms. Pooja Jain, CA Revenue by Shri Krishan Kumar (SR. DR.) Date of Hearing 09.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 13 .01.2026 ORDER Per: SMT. BEENA PILLAI, J.M.:- Present Miscellaneous Petition filed by the Revenue arises out of order dated 17.11.2025 in I.T.A. No.5541/Mum/2025. 1. The Ld. A.R. submitted that in the impugned order the appeal has been remitted to the Ld. CIT(A) instead of Ld. AO. He submitted that it would be better to remit this issue to the Ld. AO as necessary verification has been carried out by the Ld. AO. The Ld. AR contended that remitting the appeal to the Ld. CIT(A) is a mistake apparent on record. We Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 5541/Mum/2025 Rohit Amritpal Kapadia, Mumbai. have perused the submission in advance by both sides in the light of record placed before us. 2. The argument raised by Ld. AR to remit the issue to the Ld. AO cannot be considered to be mistake apparent on record. It was a con conscious decision taken by the Tribunal having regard to the relevant facts of the case. In any event for any verification the Ld. CIT(A) is very much entrusted with the power under the statute to remit the issue to the Ld. AO or call for a remand report. 2.1 We therefore do not intend to entertain this miscellaneous petition as the prayer raised herein as it amounts to review of the order passed by these Tribunal. However, in the interest of justice we directed the Ld. CIT(A) to issue notice for hearing of the appeal at the earliest and to dispose it off in a time bound manner. Accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee in the present miscellaneous petition stands dismissed. In the result, the miscellaneous petition filed by the assessee stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 13/01/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (ARUN KHODPIA) (BEENA PILLAI) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Mumbai: Dated: 13/01/2026 Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 5541/Mum/2025 Rohit Amritpal Kapadia, Mumbai. Aniket Chand, Sr. PS. Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant (2) The Respondent (3) The CIT (4) The CIT (Appeals) (5) The DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By order (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "