Atul U Rege HUF v/s Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 09/11/2023 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi. The assessee has raised several grounds for appeal, including that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte without granting an adjournment as sought by the assessee. The assessee also argues that the learned CIT(A) did not permit the appellant to raise an additional ground of appeal and erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in invoking the provisions of section 147 read with section 148. The assessee further contends that the reopening of the assessment was bad in law and that the assessing officer failed to consider substantial evidence adduced by the appellant to prove the identity, genuineness, and creditworthiness of the loan creditors.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in proceeding to pass the order ex parte without granting an adjournment as sought by the assessee.
• 2. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in not permitting the appellant to raise an additional ground of appeal.
• 3. Whether the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the assessing officer in invoking the provisions of section 147 read with section 148.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Kanta Devi W/o Suresh Kumar Ishreri vs. Income Tax Officer

  Chandigarh bench

• M/s. IQVIA RDS (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

  Bangalore bench

• Arvindbhai Lavjibhai Chaudhary Vs. Income Tax Officer

  Ahmedabad bench

• Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai

  Mumbai bench

• ITA 4386/MUM/2026

  Mumbai bench

• Natasha Talwar Vs. ACIT

  Delhi Bench ‘E’ benchAY 2010-11Allowed