ADATHIL PULIYAKANDY RAHMATH,KANNUR vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 479/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 January 2025AY 2016-17Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao (Accountant Member), Shri Prakash Chand Yadav (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the ld. CIT(A) failed to address the merits of the case as required by Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh examination, with a direction to provide the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The connected stay application was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for the assessment year 2016-2017, contending that the appeal was dismissed without considering its merits. Despite the assessee's absence, the Tribunal proceeded to decide the matter based on the available records.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal without considering its merits, and if such an order is valid under Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, warranting a remand for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

Hearing: 31.12.2024Pronounced: 22.01.2025

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No.479/Coch/2023
SA No.209/Coch/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

Asst.Year 2016-2017 & SA No.209/Coch/2023 Adathil Puliyankandy Rahmath The Income Tax Officer Sharara Bunglow Ward - 2 v. Kuyyali Road, Thalassery Kannur. Kannur – 670 101. PAN : ACVPR6273R. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by :--- None --- Respondent by : Smt.Leenalal, Sr.AR Date of Pronouncement : 22.01.2025 Date of Hearing : 31.12.2024 O R D E R

Per Prakash Chand Yadav, JM :

1.

The present appeal of the assessee and the stay applicationare arising from the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated 14th June, 2023 having DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1053710087(1) and it relates to the assessment year 2016- 2017.

2.

At the outset, it is the contention of the assessee in the grounds of appeal that the learned Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without considering the issues on merits.

SA 209/Coch/2023. Adathil Puliyakandy Rahmath. 4. No body appeared from the side of assessee, despite the service of the notice. However, in the interest of justice we are deciding the matter on the basis of material available on record.

3.

The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below and contended that the appeal may be dismissed.

4.

After considering the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record, we observe that the ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the merits of the case, in terms of sec.250(6) of the Act. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we remit this matter to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for examining afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, the ld.CIT(A) will afford a reasonable opportuniy of being heard to the assessee.

5.

Since the appeal is disposed of, the stay application becomes infructuous, and accordingly, the same is dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay application is dismissed.

Order pronounced on this 22nd day of January, 2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →