SHAHUL HAMEED ABDUL JABBAR,PALAKKAD vs. ITO, WARD-2, PALAKKAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 292/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 November 2024Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT restored the appeal to the NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits, providing the assessee with opportunities to present their case. The assessee was directed to file and prove all relevant facts.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the NFAC, leading to an ex-parte order. The ITAT noted that the NFAC did not decide the substantive grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC's ex-parte order adequately adjudicated the substantive grounds of appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Hearing: 23.08.2024Pronounced: 07.11.2024

O R D E R Per Bench : This assessee’s appeal assessment year 2021-2022 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1060428743(1) dated 02.02.2024 in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.

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

2.

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 . Sri.Shahul Hameed Abdul Jabbar. 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 file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

3.

Delay of 06 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned in light of Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) having settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the cause of substantial justice.

4.

This, assessee’s appeal ITA.No.292/Coch/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →