SHIRISH MANILAL MEHTA ,MUMBAI V. ITO 27(3)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 3452/MUM/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by Shirish Manilal Mehta against the order of the CIT(A)/NFAC, which confirmed the assessing officer's ex-parte order for the assessment year 2011-12. The primary contention was that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to present his case, as he had not received any notice from the assessing officer due to a change in residence. The assessing officer had added the entire sale consideration of an immovable property, in which the assessee held only a 1/10 share, to the assessee's income without proper verification. The CIT(A) upheld this addition, noting the absence of any submission from the assessee. The Tribunal, considering the principles of natural justice and the assessee's undertaking to comply more diligently in the future, decided to restore the matter to the assessing officer for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 711398 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDRA MOHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: VENUGOPAL NAIR
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3452/MUM/2025 (AY: 2011-12) (Physical hearing) Shirish Manilal Mehta B/48, Gurudev Apartments, R.C. Marg, Chembur Naka, Chembur East, Mumbai-400071. [PAN No. AJSPM7344N] Vs ITO – 27(3)(3), Mumbai Room No. 426, 4th Floor, Tower No. 6, Vashi Railway Station, Commercial Complex, Vashi, Navi Mumbai-400703. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Shri Venugopal Nair, CA Revenue by Sh. Surendra Mohan, Sr. DR Date of Institution 16.05.2025 Date of hearing 23.07.2025 Date of pronouncement 23.07.2025 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER; 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dated 19.03.2025 for assessment year (AY) 2011-12. 2. Rival submissions of both the parties have been heard and record perused. The learned Authorised Representative (ld. AR) of the assessee submits that assessing officer as well as ld. CIT(A) passed the ex-parte order without allowing fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. No notice from assessing officer was received by the assessee as the assessee has shifted his residence. The assessee obtained the copy of assessment order from the office of assessing officer. The assessing officer made addition on the basis of information that assessee has sold immovable property for Rs. 49.51 lacs. The assessee was having only 1/10 share in the property. In absence of any explanation, the assessing officer added entire sale consideration in the name Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3452/Mum/2025 Shrish Manilal Mehta 2 of assessee without verification of information. The ld. CIT(A) also confirmed the action of assessing officer by holding that assessee has not filed any submission. The ld CIT(A) has not adjudicated the appeal on merit. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed if one more opportunity to contest the case is allowed. Substantial right of assessee are involved in the matter. The assessee is interested in persuading his case on merit and he undertakes on behalf of assessee to be more vigilant in future. He prayed to restore the matter to the file of assessing officer. 2. On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue supported the order of lower authorities. The ld. Sr. DR submits that assessee is a habitual defaulter in not making timely compliance. The e-mail address mentioned on Form-35 belongs to present AR of the assessee. Thus, the assessee does not deserve any further leniency and the appeal is liable to be dismissed. 3. I have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and perused the record. I find that both the lower authorities have passed ex-parte order against the assessee for the want of submission. Considering the submission of ld. AR of the assessee that in the immovable property sold during the relevant financial year, wherein the assessee is having one-tenth share only. The assessing officer added entire sale consideration to the income of assessee. Such addition is made without proper verification of such information. Further, keeping in view the facts that ld. AR of the assessee has undertaken on behalf of the assessee to be more vigilant in future. Hence, Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 3452/Mum/2025 Shrish Manilal Mehta 3 keeping in view the principle of natural justice, the matter is restored back to the file of assessing officer to pass assessment order afresh. Needless to direct that assessing officer shall allow fair and reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The assessee is directed to be more vigilant in future in making timely compliance and not to seek any adjournment without any valid reason. The assessee shall provide all required information and documentary evidence to the assessing officer. In the result, ground of appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order was pronounced in the open Court on /07/2025 at the time of hearing. Sd/- PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, Dated 23/07/2025 Biswajit Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Assessee; (2) The Revenue; (3) The PCIT / CIT (Judicial); (4) The DR, ITAT, Mumbai; and (5) Guard file. By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Mumbai Printed from counselvise.com "