HOLISTIC ADVISORY SERVICES,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3), GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 202/GTY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati13 March 2026AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC had passed a cryptic and non-speaking order. The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's submission that not all evidence was placed before the AO and that the NFAC's order lacked proper consideration. In the interest of justice and fair play, the Tribunal decided to restore the appeal to the file of the learned AO. The AO was directed to decide the appeal on its merits after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The Tribunal also clarified that the assessee should not seek adjournments unless for valid and reasonable cause. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Holistic Advisory Services, filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 28.05.2025, for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The assessee contended that the NFAC's order was cryptic and non-speaking, failing to consider all submitted facts and evidence. Furthermore, the assessee argued that not all evidence could be presented before the Assessing Officer (AO). Consequently, the assessee requested that the matter be restored to the AO for re-adjudication based on the evidence. The Revenue, represented by the Departmental Representative (DR), relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, is a speaking order that has considered all the facts and evidences filed by the assessee, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that the NFAC's order was cryptic and non-speaking, dismissing the appeal in a single paragraph without due consideration of the facts and evidence submitted. The assessee also stated that not all evidence was placed before the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the assessee prayed for the restoration of the issue to the AO for re-adjudication on merits after presenting all evidence. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue relied on the orders of the authorities below.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘GAUHATI BENCH’, GUWAHATI

Before: SHRIDUVVURU RL REDDY, VP & SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goenka, AR
For Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, DR
Hearing: 12.03.2026Pronounced: 13.03.2026

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 28.05.2025 for the AY 2017-18.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT (A) has passed a very cryptic and non-speaking order dismissing the appeal in just one Para by passing a two page order without taking into account all the facts and evidences filed by the assessee. Besides the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that even before the ld. AO all the evidences could not be brought on record. Therefore, in the interest of justice and fair play, the issue may be restored to the file of the ld. AO so that the facts could be placed

3.

The ld. DR on the other hand relied on the orders of the authorities below heavily.

4.

We, after hearing the submission of the parties and perusing the material available on record, find that CIT (A) has passed a very cryptic and non-speaking order by dismissing the appeal of the assessee. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that before the ld. AO all the evidences could not be brought on record, therefore prayed that the case of the assessee may be restored to the fild of the ld. AO so that the facts could be placed before him. In our opinion, in the interest of justice and fair play, this appeal is restored to the file of the learned AO with a direction to decide the same on merit after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is further clarified that assessee should also not seek any adjournments unless otherwise required for valid and reasonable cause.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 13.03.2026.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →