MIDHUN JOSHY,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO NON CORP WARD 1(3), KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 142/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024AY 2017-18Bench: 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 CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without properly dealing with the facts and without framing points of determination. Therefore, the issue was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh verification and adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 was filed against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The CIT(A) had confirmed the addition of Rs. 16,10,600 as unexplained cash credit under Section 68.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal by not dealing with the factual matrix and points of determination. Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) is sustainable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 22.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2017-18 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/10482315829(1) dated 26.12.2022 in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. We accordingly proceed exparte against the assessee.

2.

It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from the Revenue’s side that the CIT(A)/NFAC has passed exparte lower appellate order confirming the Assessing Officer’s action adding section 68 unexplained cash credit of Midhun Joshi Rs.16,10,600/- without dealing with the relevant factual matrix as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act requiring it to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon. Faced with this situation, we deem it fit appropriate to restore the instant issue back to the CIT(A)-NFAC for it’s afresh verification and adjudication with a rider that it shall be the assessee’s risk and responsibility only to plead and prove all the relevant facts within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →