JEWEL HOMES PVT LTD,KOCHI vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), KOCHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeal to the NFAC for fresh adjudication, acknowledging the communication gap. The assessee was directed to file and prove all relevant facts in the subsequent proceedings.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed it did not receive hearing notices due to a communication gap between its head office, auditor, and counsel. This communication gap occurred during a faceless assessment proceeding.
What were the issues?
Whether the assessee was prevented from appearing due to a genuine communication gap, warranting a restoration of the appeal for fresh adjudication.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
(alongwith its stay application SA No.193/Coch/2023 therein) for assessment year 2011-2012 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1042912078(1) dated 29.04.2022 in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.
Heard both the parties. Case files perused.
The assessee claims that it could not actually received the relevant hearing notices on account of communication gap amongst its head office, statutory auditor as well as the SA No.193/Coch/2023. Jewel Homes Private Limited. arguing counsel level. Faced with this situation, such a communication gap in the instant faceless assessment could not be altogether ruled out. We thus 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. Ordered accordingly.
To sum up, this assessee’s appeal SA.No. 193/Coch/2023 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. A copy of the common order be placed in the case files.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
