MANALEL AGENCIES,THIRUVALLA vs. ADDL.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVALLA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 104/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 November 2024AY 2014-15Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the NFAC's order did not adjudicate the assessee's grounds on merits as required. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was heard ex parte as no one appeared on their behalf. The National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) had previously rejected the assessee's contentions without deciding the substantive grounds on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC's order properly adjudicated the assessee's grounds on merits. The procedural fairness of the NFAC's ex parte order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271E,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

Hearing: 14.08.2024Pronounced: 05.11.2024

O R D E R Per Bench : This assessee’s appeal in 2014-2015 arises from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1058948261(1) dated 21.12.2023, in proceedings u/s.271E of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.

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

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the NFAC has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the . Manalel Agencies. lower appellate proceedings before rejecting it’s contentions vide ex-parte order under challenge. Learned 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. Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 271E

All 968 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271E →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →