SHRI. REVANNA KUMARA,RAMANAGARA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, RAMANAGARA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the impugned order was not a speaking one and the assessee's case was not considered. To prevent miscarriage of justice, the issue was remitted to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was against an order passed by the NFAC, which arose from an assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147. The First Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal in limine without considering the merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the First Appellate Authority passed a speaking order and considered the merits of the assessee's case.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI
ORDER
PER MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
The instant appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 20.04.2023 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi arising out of the order dated 18.11.2019 passed by the ITO, Ward No. 1, Ramanagar u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for A.Y. 2012-13.
It appears from the order impugned that the same is not a speaking one. According to the Ld.CIT(A), details as directed to be submitted by the appellant on various occasions, no adequate reply was furnished by the appellant nor adjournment application has been sought for and thus the matter was dismissed in limine without considering the merit of the matter. As the order is not a speaking one, neither the case made out by the assessee was ultimately been considered by the First Appellate Authority, we in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice, express our opinion before the court to remit the issue to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the issue. No objection, however was raised by either of the parties. In that view of the matter, the instant appeal is disposed of by remitting the issue to the file of Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication of the same afresh upon considering evidence on record or any other evidence which the appellant may choose to file during the appellate proceeding.
We also make it clear that in the event the assessee does not cooperate with the First Appellate Authority, he would be at liberty to proceed with the appeal to adjudicate the same and to dispose of by passing a speaking order strictly in accordance with law. The appellant appeal is, therefore, disposed of for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20th September, 2023.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Aasha Industries vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- M/S Bharat Iron Scrap vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026