SHUBHAM REALTY,MUMBAI V. DCIT CC-3(4), MUMBAI

ITA 5356/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Shubham Realty, the appellant, contesting an ex parte order passed by the CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The appellant argued that there was a miscommunication leading to their representative's non-appearance at the CIT(A), resulting in an ex parte decision. The Tribunal acknowledged the genuine circumstances that led to the non-representation and remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough examination on merits, emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 833482 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 29-08-2025
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LIMBASIYA KAVAN NARESHKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SHASHI BEKAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 5356/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shubham Realty Gate No. 10, Brabourne Stadium 87 Veer Nariman Road Churchgate Mumbai - 400020 [PAN: ACKFS6281K] Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income tax, Central Circle – 3(4), Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Shashi Bekal, AR Revenue by Shri Limbasiya Kavan Nareshkumar, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 06.02.2026 ORDER Per Smt. Beena Pillai, JM: Present appeal filed by assessee arises out of order dated 09/06/2025 passed by NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter “the Ld.CIT(A)”], for Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that, the assessee was not properly represented before Ld.CIT(A). He submitted that, all the notices received by the assessee were forwarded to the authorized representative and that the assessee was under the bona fide belief that the appellate proceedings were being pursued by the representative at regular intervals. The Ld.AR submitted that, however, due to miscommunication, the representative did not appear before the First appellate authority and an ex parte order Printed from counselvise.com 2 I.T.A. No. 5356/Mum/2025 was passed by Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.AR submitted that non- appearance before the Ld.CIT(A) was not a deliberate act by the assessee and there was no mala fide intention in doing so. He submitted that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee for representing its case before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld. AR thus prayed for remand of the appeal to the file of Ld.CIT(A). 2.1. The Ld. DR, though not supporting the arguments of the Ld. AR, however, could not controvert the submissions made. Perused the submissions advanced by both the sides in light of the material placed on record. 3. Admittedly, the Ld.DR could not controvert the submissions filed by assessee and the arguments advanced by Ld.AR to substantiate the non-appearance before Ld.CIT(A). It is noted that assessee, under genuine circumstances, could not respond to the notices issued by revenue during the assessment proceedings. 3.1. In the interest of justice, Ld.CIT(A) is directed to decide the issue on merits. The appeal is thus remitted back to Ld.CIT(A) to consider and decide all the grounds raised by assessee in accordance with law. Needless to say that proper opportunity of being heard must be granted to assessee. Accordingly, grounds raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Printed from counselvise.com 3 I.T.A. No. 5356/Mum/2025 In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 06/02/2026 Sd/- (BEENA PILLAI) Judicial Member Mumbai Dated: 06/02/2026 SC Sr. P.S. 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 "