ITA No.3084/M/2024

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

In the instant case, the Assessing Officer (AO) made additions of Rs.28,00,000/- and Rs.4,03,103/- on account of unexplained investment and income respectively. The Assessee challenged these additions before the Ld. Commissioner, but due to non-compliance, the Commissioner dismissed the appeal as ex-parte. The Assessee claimed compliance by filing documents during the appellate proceedings and requested adjournments, which were not granted. The Assessee argued that the Commissioner failed to decide the issues properly and dismissed the appeal without considering the merits.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner dismissed the appeal properly?
• 2. Whether the Assessee's non-compliance was genuine?

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Shri Shailesh Kantilal Shah vs. Income Tax Officer-Ward 19(3)(1)

  Mumbai bench

• Subodh Adhikary vs. ITO Ward 51(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Ms. Tejal Nilesh Sorthi vs. Income Tax Officer

  Mumbai bench

• Ranveer Singh vs. ITO, Ward 2(1)(2), Agra

  Agra bench

• Navtech Tradelink Pvt. Ltd vs. ITO, Ward-2(1), Kolkata

• M/s. Shivshakti Technology Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

  Mumbai bench