NATIONAL RADIO ELECTRONICS,KANNUR vs. ITO, CIRCLE-1, KANNUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that the NFAC's order was a mere dismissal without independent application of mind. Therefore, the order was set aside for a fresh de novo disposal.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a partnership firm, filed its return of income for AY 2017-18. The AO made additions under Section 36(1)(va) and Section 145A, increasing the total income significantly. The CIT(A)/NFAC confirmed the AO's order.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC's order was passed with due application of mind and independent finding. Whether the additions made by the AO were justified.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
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
O R D E R
Per Inturi Rama Rao, AM :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A) / NFAC DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1059382503(1) dated 4th January, 2024 for the assessment year 2017-2018.
Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of dealing with the electronics and home appliances. The return of income for the assessment year 2017-2018 was filed on 31.01.2018 declaring income of Rs.1,49,69,270. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (AO) vide order dated 27.12.2019
(i) Addition u/s.36(va) of the Act Rs.2,75,999 (ii) Addition to the value of closing stock u/s.145A of the Act. Rs.2,34,58,940
Being aggrieved by the above assessment order, the assessee has filed appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO.
Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us in the present appeal. When the appeal was called, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits based on the written submission available on record.
We have heard the learned Departmental Representative and perused the material on record. On perusal of the order passed by the NFAC it would reveal that the NFAC had merely dismissed the appeal after extracting the statement of facts and assessment order without stating the points for consideration and giving an independent finding on the issues raised in the grounds of appeal. Thus, the order of the NFAC does not exhibit any independent application of mind. Therefore, the order passed by the NFAC is hereby set aside to the file of the NFAC for fresh de novo disposal of the appeal on merits in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Order pronounced on this 09th day of December, 2024.
More judgments on Section 36(1)(va)
- Vco Consulatatns and Sevices Private… vs ITO, Corporate Ward 3(3), ChennaiITA 2145/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- R K Swamy Limited, Chennai vs DCIT Non Corporate Circle 10(1), ChennaiITA 504/CHNY/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- M/S. R.K. Swamy Ltd., Chennai vs DCIT, Ncc-10(1), ChennaiITA 2822/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 839/IND/2025[2023-2024]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2023-2024
- Rajesh Maru, Mhow vs ITO-5(1), IndoreITA 838/IND/2025[2022-2023]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2022-2023
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. V J Petro Products vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St) - IiiAndhra Pradesh · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Asian Aura vs. Government Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026