Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an order from the Addl./JCIT(A). The Addl./JCIT(A) declined to adjudicate the appeal, asserting that an intimation under Section 143(1) is merely an adjustment and not an appealable order, relying on an old CBDT Circular.
Held
The ITAT held that an intimation under Section 143(1) is appealable before the CIT(A) as per Section 246(1)(a). The ITAT set aside the Addl./JCIT(A)'s order, remanding the matter back for fresh adjudication on merits after providing the assessee an opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
Whether an intimation issued under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act is an appealable order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), and whether the CIT(A) can refuse to adjudicate such an appeal based on an outdated CBDT circular.
Sections Cited
250, 143(1), 246(1)(a), 154
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH”, KOLKATA
M/s Softzone Techpark Pvt. Ltd., C/o M/s Salarpuria Jajodia & Co., 5, C.R. Avenue, 4th Floor, Kolkata - 700072 [PAN: AAMCS5238D] ……..…...…………….... Appellant vs. ACIT, Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata - 700069 ................................. Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Siddharth Jhajharia, FCA Department represented by : Sanat Kumar Raha, CIT-DR S.B. Chakraborthy, Sr. DR Date of concluding the hearing : 22.07.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 24.07.2025 O R D E R
PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
The present appeal emanates from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A)-2, Coimbatore [hereafter “the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)], vide order dated 30.01.2025.
1.1 In this case, right at the outset, the Ld. AR pointed out the operational portion of the impugned order [para 6.9]. To appreciate the controversy the said paragraph needs to be reproduced as under:
“6.9 In view of above discussion, as per the clarification issued by the CBDT vide circular no 549 dated 31.10.1989, the intimation passed by CPC u/s 143(1) is merely an adjustment, but not a valid order to file appeal. As the appellant has not been provided an opportunity of being heard by AO-CPC before passing order M/s Softzone Techpark Pvt. Ltd. u/s 143(1), the AO is directed to obtain necessary details from the appellant to decide the merits of the case in the light of above discussion and pass necessary order after providing sufficient opportunities of being heard u/s 154 on suomotto. The appellant may furnish all the details as requested by AO for passing order u/s 154. For statistical purpose, this ground is treated as allowed.” 1.2 The Ld. AR drew our attention to the fact that the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) had misdirected himself in following an old CBDT Circular dated 31.10.1989 and refused to adjudicate on the issues before him. The Ld. AR prayed that the first appellate authority should be directed to adjudicate on the grounds of appeal as per Form 35 filed before him.
The Ld. DR was asked for comments and he left it to the wisdom of the Bench to pass an appropriate order in this matter.
We have carefully perused the records before us and have also gone through the relevant provisions which govern appealable orders before the Ld. JCIT(A). We find that as per section 246(1)(a) of the Act, the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act is appealable before the JCIT(A). In light of this clear- cut provision of the Act, it is felt that the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has displayed a rare ignorance of law and given his findings in the impugned order at para 6.9 (supra). We set aside the impugned order and remand this matter back to the file of Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) to pass a speaking order with respect to the grounds of appeal as per the Form 35, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 24.07.2025