NAVANEETH VISHNU,THRISSUR vs. F INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)DY.COMMISSIONER O, THRISSUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 718/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024AY 2013-14Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the NFAC's order lacked proper adjudication on the merits of the assessee's contentions. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the NFAC due to non-appearance. The ITAT noted that the NFAC's order did not decide the substantive grounds on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC's order properly adjudicated the substantive grounds of appeal on merits when the assessee did not appear. The procedural requirement for the NFAC to provide points for determination and detailed adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

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: 16.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

2013-2014 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055943820(1) dated 11.09.2023 in proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.

Case called twice. None appears at the behest of the assessee. It 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 . Sri.Navneeth Vishnu. 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.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →