Loading judgment…
Facts
The appellant, Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Board, is challenging an order that dismissed their appeal for non-prosecution. The AO had taxed the entire income of the appellant, claiming it was excess over application.
Held
The CIT(A) is required to dispose of appeals on merits, even if disposed ex-parte, as per Section 250(6) of the Act and established legal precedent.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating the merits of the case.
Sections Cited
10(23C)(iv), 143(3), 250(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JM
O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Bengaluru [CIT(A)] dated 12.03.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a Board constituted by the Government of Kerala under the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Scheme, 1985. The Board applies income for application wholly and exclusively for the purpose for which it was established. It was claimed that the income of the Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Board Board is eligible for exemption u/s. 10(23C)(iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The return of income for AY 2012-13 was filed on 26.09.2012 disclosing Nil income and the same was revised on 26.03.2013. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the ITO (Exemption), Kollam (hereinafter called "the AO") vide order dated 18.03.2015 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act at a total income of Rs. 34,86,41,163/-. While doing so, the AO brought to tax the excess of income over application of income by Rs. 34,86,41,163/- as taxable income of the appellant.
Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal for non prosecution without adjudicating the issues in the appeal on merits.
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal.
We find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non prosecution. As contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act the CIT(A) is required to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon before passing the order. It is the settled position of law that the CIT(A), even while disposing of the appeal exparte, is duty bound to dispose of the appeal on merits. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra 279 CTR 614. Therefore, in the light of the above legal position we Kerala Motor Transport Workers Welfare Fund Board are of the considered view that the matter requires to be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to dispose of the appeal de novo on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 31st July, 2025.