VENKATESWARA DIVAKARA SHENONY,ERNAKULAM vs. ACIT NON CORP WARD 2(1), KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 447/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 framing points of determination as required. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification and adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2017-18 was against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The CIT(A) had confirmed an addition of Rs. 52,52,500 made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 for unexplained cash credits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a proper order dealing with the facts and points of determination, or if the order was ex-parte and lacked due consideration.

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 Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CA
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/250/2023- 24/10520669045(1) dated 13.04.2023 in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the CIT(A)/NFAC has passed exparte order confirming the Assessing Officer’s action making section 68 addition of Rs.52,52,500/- on account of unexplained cash credits, without dealing with the relevant factual matrix as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act requiring him to frame points of determination followed by a detailed Venkateswara Divakara Shenoy discussion thereon. Faced with this situation, we deem it fit appropriate to restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh verification and adjudication with the rider that it shall be the assessee’s risk and responsibility only to plead and prove all the related facts within three effective opportunities of hearing. Ordered accordingly.

3.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 68

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →