SINGHAL TRADEXIM PRIVATE LIMITED,NOIDA vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 191/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 May 2025AY 2014-2015Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the CIT(A) proceeded ex-parte, there might have been communication gaps due to the new faceless hearing system. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 arises against an order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The case was called twice, and since the assessee did not appear, it was proceeded ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate authority's ex-parte decision without proper adjudication warrants a fresh hearing, considering potential communication issues with the new faceless system.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 144,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman

Hearing: 13.05.2025Pronounced: 13.05.2025

ORDER

Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

1.

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024–25/1070298734(1) dated 12.11.2024, in proceedings u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”)

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding Singhal Tradexim Pvt. Ltd. disallowances/additions herein. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the CIT(A)/NFAC to first frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.

4.

Mr. Ramesh Chand vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.

6.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →