BLUE NILE EXPORTS AND IMPORTS PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORP. CIRCLE-1(1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1315/CHNY/2026Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 July 2026AY 2017-184 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT held that the CIT(A) has a statutory obligation to pass a speaking and reasoned order, even if the appellant fails to appear. Dismissing an appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits is not in accordance with law.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not file its return of income for AY 2017-18. The assessment was reopened under Section 147, and additions were made based on export transactions. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without examining the merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating the grounds of appeal on merits. Whether the CIT(A) order was a speaking and reasoned order as required by law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 147,Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: MS. PADMAVATHY S & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 13.05.2026

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

The captioned Appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi, [CIT(A)] dated 20.09.2024 Assessment Year 2017-18.

2.

In the instant appeals, the registry has noted the delay of 461 days in filing the captioned appeal. We have gone through the condonation petition along with affidavit filed, we find that the reasons given by the assessee are sufficient cause for delay in filing

ITA No 1315/Chny/2026 (AY 2017-18) Blue Nile Exports and Exports Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT CC 1(1) :: 2 :: the captioned appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication.

2.1 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is noticed from the assessment order that the assessee had not filed its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the basis of information that the assessee had entered into export transactions through shipping bills amounting to Rs. 2,62,11,923/-. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the assessee furnished copies of export invoices and the sale register. On verification of the documents, the Assessing Officer observed that export sales aggregating to Rs. 2,88,04,014/- had allegedly escaped assessment. Accordingly, the assessment was completed under section 147 read with section 143(3) of the Act by treating the said amount of Rs. 2,88,04,014/- as the income of the assessee under the head "Profits and Gains of Business or Profession".

3.

On perusal of the impugned appellate order, we find that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal primarily on the ground that, after filing the Statement of Facts, the assessee neither responded to the hearing notices nor furnished further documentary evidence. The ld.CIT(A) has, therefore, presumed that the assessee was not interested in pursuing the appeal and, without examining the merits of the additions or adjudicating the grounds raised, simply affirmed the assessment order.

ITA No 1315/Chny/2026 (AY 2017-18) Blue Nile Exports and Exports Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT CC 1(1) :: 3 :: 4. In our considered opinion, such an approach is not in accordance with law. The first appellate authority is vested with quasi-judicial powers and is under a statutory obligation to dispose of the appeal by passing a speaking and reasoned order in terms of section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Even where the appellant does not appear or fails to comply with notices, the CIT(A) cannot dismiss the appeal for non-prosecution simpliciter but is required to adjudicate the issues arising from the assessment order on the basis of the material available on record and record independent findings on each ground of appeal.

5.

In the present case, the impugned order does not contain any discussion on the merits of the addition of Rs. 2,88,04,014/-, nor does it deal with the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. The order merely proceeds on the basis of alleged non-compliance and confirms the assessment without assigning any reasons. Such an order does not satisfy the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act and cannot be sustained. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, we set aside the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for adjudication afresh. The ld.CIT(A) shall provide adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee, consider such evidence and submissions as may be filed in accordance with law, and thereafter pass a speaking and reasoned order on merits dealing with each of the grounds of appeal in accordance with section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and promptly comply with all notices and directions issued during the appellate proceedings. Failure to do so shall entitle the ld.CIT(A) to decide the appeal on the basis of the material available on record in accordance with law.

ITA No 1315/Chny/2026 (AY 2017-18) Blue Nile Exports and Exports Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT CC 1(1) :: 4 :: 6. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the 06th day of July 2026 in Chennai.

Sd/- Sd/- (प�ावती एस) (मनु कुमार िग�र) (PADMAVATHY S) (MANU KUMAR GIRI) लेखा सद)या/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद)य/JUDICIAL MEMBER चे�नई/Chennai, *दनांक/Dated: 06th July, 2026. SNDP, Sr. PS आदेश क ��त+ल,प अ-े,षत/Copy to: 1. अपीलाथ�/Appellant 2. ��थ�/Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�/CIT, Chennai / Madurai / Salem / Coimbatore. 4. िवभागीय�ितिनिध/DR 5. गाड�फाईल/GF Digitally signed SANDE by SANDEEP KUMAR EP Date: 2026.07.08 KUMAR 09:56:19 +05'30'

More judgments on Section 147

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →