MUTHUSWAMY (HUF),TIRUCHENGODE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, TIRUCHENGODE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 99/CHNY/2024Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 July 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI ABY T VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found deficiencies in the orders of the lower authorities as there was no finding on the merits of the addition. The assessee was given one last opportunity to present their case before the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against the CIT(A)'s order which confirmed an ex-parte order passed by the AO. The assessee contended that the CIT(A) did not consider their submissions.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred by confirming an ex-parte order without considering the assessee's submissions and evidence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEY & SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA

Pronounced: 10.07.2024

आदेश / O R D E R

PER AMITABH SHUKLA, A.M :

This appeal is filed against the order bearing DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057993314(1) dated 16.11.2023 of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax [herein after “CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Center[NFAC], Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18.

Through the aforesaid appeal the assesse has challenged order u/s 250 dated 16.11.2023 passed by NFAC, Delhi.

2.0 At the outset the Ld.Council of the assesse informed that the Ld.CIT(A) has confirmed the ex parte order of the Ld.AO without considering the submissions made by it before him. Accordingly, request was made to send the file to the Ld.CIT(A) for readjudication. The Ld.DR did not contest the proposal.

3.0 We have considered the rival’s submissions in the light of the facts of case and material available on records. Grounds of appeal raised by the assesse allude that the assesse has challenged the action of the AO and the Ld.CIT(A) in not considering its arguments and evidences.

The AO has passed an exparte order which has been confirmed by the Ld.CIT(A) as the assesse did not respond to his notices as well. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) shows that there is no finding on the merits of the addition. The appellant has also failed to provide any concrete written submissions to contradict the findings of the AO before the Ld.CIT(A).

Thus seen the order of the lower authorities suffers from deficiencies and deserve to be set aside. We are of the view that ends of justice would be met if the assesse is given one last opportunity to present its case and file supporting evidences, as requested, before the Ld. CIT(A) . Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for readjudication, if required after obtaining a remand report from the Ld.AO. The assesse is directed to make complete and correct compliance towards the notices issued by the lower authorities. To the extent the order of the lower authorities is set aside and the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse are partly allowed. 4.0 In the result the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 10th July, 2024 at Chennai.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →