STUTI MAHENDRA HINGORANI,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 31(2)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5513/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Stuti Mahendra Hingorani against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, pertaining to the Assessment Year 2015-16. The primary contention was the non-admission of additional evidences and the dismissal of the appeal on grounds of non-prosecution. The assessee challenged the procedural fairness, particularly the use of an incorrect email ID for communication. The Tribunal, after considering the circumstances, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 785941 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 03-09-2025
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HEMANSHU JOSHI
• Keywords: Set aside; Additional evidence
• Section: 147

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “E” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 5513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Stuti Mahendra Hingorani, A-305, Regency Lokhanduala Complex, Andheri West, Mumbai-400058. PAN : ADFPH3280F vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-31(2)(1), Kautilya Bhavan, C-41 to C-43, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : NONE For Revenue : Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 30-10-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31-10-2025 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)-National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [„Ld.CIT(A)‟], dated 27-08-2024, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 5513/Mum/2025 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee nor was any adjournment application filed. Considering that the matter has been adjourned from time to time and notice has been duly served on the assessee and inspite of that, there is no representation on behalf of the assessee, it was decided that no useful purpose would be served in adjourning the matter any further and to decide the matter based on material available on record. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that assessment in this case was completed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟), wherein the assessed income was determined at Rs. 3,71,32,960/-. The assessee thereafter carried the matter in appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), who has dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution. 4. Heard the Ld.DR and perused the material available on record. 5. We find that as part of the Form-35, the assessee has moved an application under Rule 46A for admission of additional evidences and the application as well as the additional evidences were uploaded as part of appeal documentation. However, there is no adjudication in terms of the admission of additional evidences and even on merits of the case. In one of the grounds of appeal raised before us, the assessee has also challenged the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) for the reason that notices were sent on E-mail ID, which does not belong to the assessee. We, therefore, find that in the interest of justice, and fair play, the matter needs to be set aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the assessee‟s application for admission of additional evidences under Rule 46A especially in light of the fact that the assessment order was also passed u/s. 144B of the Act as well as to decide on the merits of the matter afresh as per law, after providing Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 5513/Mum/2025 reasonable opportunity to the assessee. The matter is accordingly set-aside to the file of the Ld.CIT(A). 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31-10-2025 Sd/- Sd/- [MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL] [VIKRAM SINGH YADAV] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai, Dated: 31-10-2025 TNMM 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 "