SALASAR SYNTHETICS,RUDARPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4/DDN/2024Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 March 2025AY 2016-17Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member & Sh. M. Balaganesh (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT noted that the CIT(A) also proceeded ex-parte and lacked detailed adjudication. In the interest of justice, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2016-17 was heard ex-parte by the CIT(A)/NFAC, who affirmed the Assessing Officer's additions. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

Whether the lower appellate authority properly adjudicated the appeal when proceeding ex-parte against the assessee and whether there was a lack of detailed discussion in the order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, DEHRADUN

Before: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godara & Sh. M. Balaganesh

Hearing: 18.03.2025Pronounced: 18.03.2025

Asstt. Year : 2016-17 Salasar Synthetics, Vs ACIT, Plot No. 9A, Sector-4, Pantnagar, Circle, Haldwani, U.K.-263153 Haldwani, U.K.-263139 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. ABQFS2858B Assessee by: None Revenue by: Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 18.03.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 18.03.2025 ORDER Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member:

This assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17, arises against the CIT(A)/NFAC, Delhi’s DIN & order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1058008466(1) dated 17.11.2023, in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

Case called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

3.

It emerges at the outset during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)/NFAC’s detailed discussion has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee thereby affirming the Assessing Officer’s action making the corresponding Salasar Synthetics disallowances/additions herein. Nor do we find any substantive lower appellate adjudication as contemplated u/s 250(6) of the Act requiring the CIT(A)/NFAC to first frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon.

4.

Mr. Amar Pal Singh vehemently argues during the course of hearing in support of CIT(A)’s finding that the assessee had not filed any explanation or evidence supporting it’s case and therefore, his instant appeal deserves to be dismissed.

5.

We have given our thoughtful consideration to the foregoing rival stand and are of the considered view that since the CIT(A) has proceeded ex-parte against the assessee, possibility of some communication gaps between the taxpayer and the arguing counsel involving the newly introduced system of faceless hearings, could not be altogether ruled out.

6.

Faced with this situation, in the larger interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for it’s afresh appropriate adjudication, within three effective opportunities subject to a rider that the taxpayer shall plead and prove the case at his own risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18/03/2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →