MR.ELINJIKKAL DEVASSYKUTTY REJU,THRISSUR vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), THRISSUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 588/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024AY 2015-16Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh verification and adjudication. The assessee was given three opportunities to plead and prove their case.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed Rs. 20,13,800/- as agricultural income. The Assessing Officer made an addition, and the CIT(A)/NFAC passed an ex-parte order confirming this addition without proper adjudication.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC properly adjudicated the appeal by considering the facts and framing points of determination, or if the order was passed ex-parte without due diligence.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,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

For Appellant: Shri C.A. Paulson, CA
For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 23.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 588/Coch/2023
SA No. 123/Coch/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2015-16 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1050343184(1) dated 02.03.2023 in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

Heard both the parties. Case files perused.

2.

It emerges at the outset with the able assistance coming from both the parties that the CIT(A)/NFAC has passed ex-parte it’s lower appellate order confirming the Assessing Officer’s action making addition of Rs. 20,13,800/- claimed as agricultural income 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 SA 123/C/2023 Elinjikkal Devassykutty Reju 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.

Delay of 101 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned as per assessee’s solemn averments 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.588/Coch/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay application SA.No.123/Coch./2023 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →