Golden Play Private Limited Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
Mumbai ITAT held that the CIT(A) cannot summarily dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating the issues on merits, especially legal grounds like validity of reopening u/s 148.
The case involved an addition of ₹75 lakh u/s 68 for alleged accommodation entries. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex-parte, merely concurring with the AO, without:
- Independently examining the facts, or
- Deciding the legal challenge to reopening, which goes to the root of jurisdiction
The Tribunal emphasized:
- CIT(A) is a quasi-judicial authority with co-terminus powers with AO
- It is mandatory to pass a speaking order addressing all grounds raised
- Even in absence of assessee, appeal must be decided on merits based on record
- Jurisdictional issues (like reopening) cannot be ignored
Accordingly, the ITAT:
- Set aside the CIT(A)’s order
- Restored the matter for fresh adjudication on all grounds, including reopening validity
- Directed providing proper opportunity of hearing
The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, reinforcing that non-prosecution ≠ dismissal without adjudication.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT MUMBAI
1. This appeal by the assessee arises from the order dated 17.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, for A.Y. 2020–21, arising from the assessment framed under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).
