NEERIKODE SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,ALANGAD vs. ITO,WARD-3, ALUVA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeal back to the NFAC for fresh adjudication. The NFAC is directed to provide at least three effective opportunities of hearing for the assessee to plead and prove its case.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was rejected ex-parte by the NFAC due to continuous non-appearance. The NFAC's order did not adjudicate the substantive grounds on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC's ex-parte order was justified without adjudicating the substantive grounds of appeal on merits.
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 Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh
Appellant by : Sri.Arun Raj S, Advocate Respondent by : Smt.V.Swarnalatha, Sr.DR Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2024 Date of Hearing : 23.08.2024 O R D E R Per Bench : This assessee’s appeal (along with stay application therein) for assessment year 2018-2019 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1060119374(1) dated 25.01.2024 in proceedings u/s.144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
It emerges during the course of hearing that the NFAC has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting the assessee’s contentions vide ex-parte order under challenge. Learned & SA 157/Coch/2024 . Neerikode SCB Ltd. Sr.DR could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the NFAC’s order has nowhere decided the assessee’s substantive grounds on merits as contemplated u/sec.250(6) of the Act requiring it to give points for determination followed by a detailed adjudication thereof. Faced with the situation, we deem it appropriate in the larger interest of justice to restore the assessee’s instant appeal back to the NFAC for it’s afresh adjudication, preferably within three effective opportunities of hearing, subject to the rider that it shall be the taxpayer’s onus and responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.
This, assessee’s appeal ITA.No.240/Coch/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms and consequently, it’s stay application SA.No.157/Coch/2024 is dismissed as rendered infructuous.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dipanshu Aggarwal vs. Director General Of GST IntelligenceDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Dezinetree Projects PVT. LTD. vs. Spokes Digital Inc And AnrDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Jaydeep Jayantilal Hudaka vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 28 Oct 2026
- 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