Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal under section 251(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, challenging an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) passed under section 250. This NFAC order stemmed from an ex-parte assessment order issued by the ITO under section 144. The NFAC's order was contradictory, setting aside the assessment for fresh consideration in one paragraph but dismissing the appeal as infructuous in another.
Held
The Tribunal found the National Faceless Appeal Centre's order irregular due to conflicting directives: setting aside the ex-parte assessment for fresh assessment while simultaneously dismissing the appeal as infructuous. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter back to the NFAC for a de-novo adjudication, deeming it fit to re-evaluate the case.
Key Issues
Whether the National Faceless Appeal Centre's order, which contained conflicting directions of setting aside an ex-parte assessment for fresh adjudication and simultaneously dismissing the appeal as infructuous, was irregular and required de-novo adjudication.
Sections Cited
Section 251(1) of Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 250 of Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 144 of Income-tax Act, 1961, Proviso to Section 251(1)(a) of Income-tax Act, 1961, Rule 18 of ITAT Rules-1963, Rule 34 of ITAT Rules-1963
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI
Before: HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI
ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; The captioned assessee’s appeal is instituted u/s 251(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter ‘the Act’] against respective order of the Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter ‘Ld. NFAC’] passed u/s 250 of the Act which in turn ascended out the order of assessment passed u/ 144 of the Act dt. 31/12/2019 by the ITO, Ward-2(3), Panaji Goa.
ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 2
Ashok Tilak Sapra Vs ITO ITA Nos.012/PAN/2025
We have heard the rival party’s common submissions; and 2. subject to the provisions of rule 18 of ITAT Rules-1963, perused the material placed on record. At the outset we note that, in view of newly inserted proviso to section 251(1)(a) of the Act vide para 6 of the impugned order the Ld. NFAC has set-aside the ex-parte assessment order passed u/s 144 of the Act for fresh assessment and however while concluding vide para 7 per-se dismissed the appeal as infructuous. Since these conflicting paragraphs turned the entire adjudication of Ld. NFAC as irregular, we therefore deem it fit to set-aside the impugned order and remit the matter back to the file of Ld. NFAC for de-novo adjudication.
In results, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 the order pronounced in the open court on date mentioned herein before.