PROCESSIA PLM PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)/NFAC's order and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The AO is directed to pass a fresh assessment order after providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
What were the facts?
The assessee company filed its return of income declaring Nil income. The Assessing Officer disallowed credit for TDS amounting to INR 15,18,619. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was dismissed ex-parte due to the assessee's absence.
What were the issues?
The primary issue was the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A)/NFAC due to the assessee's absence, preventing the verification of TDS credit. The Tribunal aimed to provide a fair hearing to address the disallowance of TDS.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.06.2025 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19.
The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “Ground No. 1: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order under section 250 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ('the Act') passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ['Ld. CIT(A)'] on 12. June 2025 is bad in law.
Ground No. 2: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, in the order under section 250 of the Act, the Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of credit of taxes deducted at source amounting to INR 15,18,619 made by the National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi ('Learned AO') in the assessment order dated 17 April 2021 passed under section 143(3) read with section 144B of the Act. Ground No. 3: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) have erred in computing and confirming the interest receivable by the Appellant under section 244A of the Act without considering the credit of taxes deducted at source amounting to INR 15,18,619. Ground No 4: The Appellant craves leave to add to and/or to alter, amend, rescind, modify the grounds herein below or produce further documents before or at the time of hearing of this Appeal.”
Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a company and has filed its return of income on 30.03.2019 declaring income of Rs.Nil. The case was selected for scrutiny and notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) respectively were issued to the assessee. After considering the submission of the assessee, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 17.04.2021 completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act and did not allowed the credit of tax deducted at source amounting to Rs.15,18,619/-.
Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the side and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal in the absence of any submission from the side of the assessee. We further find that admittedly Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC has issued various notices of hearing on the email mentioned in Form 35 Appeal Memo, however it was the contention of Ld. Counsel of the assessee that the email belongs to earlier counsel of the assessee who failed to inform the assessee regarding dates of hearing provided by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC which resulted in unfortunate ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. It was the sole prayer of the counsel of the assessee that the matter may kindly be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer since the matter involves regarding verification of TDS entries in Form 26AS. Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to pass assessment order afresh and as per fact and law after providing reasonable
More judgments on Section 144B
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Mohammed Javed Bhati, Sikar vs Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, SikarITA 994/JPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2125/AHD/2026[2019-2020]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-2020
- Haresh Sharma, Ahmedabad vs ITO, Ward 5(3)(1), AhmedabadITA 2124/AHD/2026[2019-20]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
