M/S. S.P ENGINEERS,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the NFAC's dismissal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits was unreasonable and unjustified. The matter was remanded back to the NFAC for disposal on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the NFAC for non-prosecution without considering the merits. The Assessing Officer had made additions on account of estimated business profit and unexplained credits.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without deciding the issues on merits. The need for the appellate authority to adjudicate appeals on their merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “B”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI
ORDER
PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 11.08.2023 for the assessment year 2014-15.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a firm engaged in the business of manufacturing of engineering goods. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2014-15 was filed on 30.11.2014 declaring total loss of Rs.1,88,86,180/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Pune (‘the Assessing Officer’) vide order dated 30.11.2016 passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) at total income of Rs.2,27,18,653/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs.1,46,98,625/- by estimating net profit of business income @ 15% of gross receipts and also made addition of Rs.80,20,028/- on account of unexplained credits u/s 68 of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved by the above additions, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution without going into the merits of the issue in appeal. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. When the appeal was called on, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal after hearing the ld. Sr. DR. 6. We heard the ld. Sr. DR and perused the material on record. From perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the NFAC while passing the ex-parte order had not adjudicated the issue raised in appeal on merits, instead the NFAC dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution of appeal. This approach of the NFAC is totally unreasonable and unjustified. The NFAC fell in serious error by not adjudicating the issues in appeal on merits. The settled positions of
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026