PALOOR SOMAN RAJEEV,CHERUTHONY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THODUPUZHA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dismissed the assessee's appeal ex parte without considering the merits or materials. To ensure justice and fair play, the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for a fresh examination. The assessee was directed to submit supporting documents, and the CIT(A) was instructed to grant a proper hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed Rs.45 lakhs as exempt agricultural income, leading to scrutiny due to a significant increase. Despite multiple notices under Sections 143(2), 142(1), and a final show-cause under Section 144, the assessee failed to respond or provide evidence. Consequently, the Assessing Officer completed a best judgment assessment, treating the agricultural income as unexplained.
What were the issues?
Whether the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) ex parte without considering the merits was justified, and if the agricultural income declared by the assessee was genuine.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma
Assessment Years: 2020-21 Paloor Soman Rajeev ITO, Thodupuzha v. KKP Building, Idukki Colony P O, Cheruthony, Idukki 685602, Kerala. PAN : AKZPR9669R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Sreeraj, CA Respondent by : Smt. Leena Lal, Snr AR. Date of Hearing : 05.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 13.06.2025 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated 10.03.2025 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year 2020–21.
Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed return of income for assessment year 2020-21 declaring total income of Rs.5,42,320/- and claiming agricultural income as exempt income at Rs.45 lakhs. The case of the assessee was selected under e- assessment scheme in order to scrutinize substantial increase in agricultural income as compared to that shown in preceding return and to verify the genuineness of the agricultural income and the agricultural activity of the assessee. The Assessing Officer issued statutory notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) of the Act were served
2 Paloor Soman Rajeev through both electronically and designated verification unit but no response from the assessee was received. Therefore, a final show- cause notice was issued u/s 144 of the Act providing the assessee a last opportunity to present its case and there was also no response received from the assessee. In the absence of any documentary evidence or explanation from the assessee, the Assessing Officer proceeded to the make best judgment u/s 144 of the Act and treated the entire agricultural income of Rs.45 lakhs as unexplained income and assessed the income of the assessee at Rs.50,42,320/-.
Aggrieved by the above order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), however, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee ex parte by confirming the order of the Assessing Officer without properly examining the various details or merits of the case.
At the time of hearing, the ld. AR stated that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without going into merits of the case and considering the materials submitted by the assessee Therefore, ld. AR prayed for one more opportunity to present its case before the ld. CIT(A).
On the other hand, the ld. DR has fairly agreed to the fact that in the interests of justice, the Tribunal may remand back the matter to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh.
We, after hearing the rival submission and perusing the materials available on record, find that the appeal of the assessee was dismissed ex parte by the ld. CIT(A) confirming the order of the Assessing Officer without looking into merits of the case and 3 Paloor Soman Rajeev without applying any independent findings on the merits of the case. In the interests of justice and fair play, we deem it fit to remand back the whole issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with a direction to re-examine the issue afresh after giving due opportunity of being heard to the assessee in the remand proceedings. We also direct the assessee to file supporting documents in order to substantiate its claim before the ld. CIT(A) and the ld. CIT(A) will pass order in accordance with law.
In terms of the above, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 13.06.2025.
More judgments on Section 142(1)
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Subhash Chand Saini, Jaipur vs ITO Ward, Behror, BherorITA 36/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Venish Vinodray Lalani, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, MorbiITA 197/RJT/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Gaurav Jiteshbhai Joshi, Rajkot vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1)(1), RajkotITA 1000/RJT/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S.Sri Satya Sai Constructions vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S. Sikka Motors PVT LTD vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shri Yaras Suresh Babu Prabhu Kumar vs. The Union Of INDIATelangana · 27 Oct 2026
- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
