SIBIN KURIAKOSE,KOKKOTTU vs. ITO,NON-CRP WARD 1(4), KOCHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal restored the appeal back to the CIT(A)/NFAC for fresh adjudication, directing it to provide at least three effective opportunities for hearing. The assessee bears the responsibility to prove all relevant facts.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)/NFAC was rejected ex-parte due to continuous non-appearance. The CIT(A)/NFAC's order did not decide the substantive grounds on merits.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(A)/NFAC's ex-parte order was justified without deciding the substantive grounds on merits.
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.183/Coch/2023 therein) for assessment years 2016-2017 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) / NFAC vide DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052373982(1) dated 26.04.2023 in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act” hereinafter.
Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex parte.
SA No.183/Coch/2023. Sri.Sibin Kuriakose.
It emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)/NFAC has noted the assessee’s continuous non- appearance in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting the assessee’s 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 CIT(A))/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. Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in very terms is allowed for statistical purposes in very terms and the corresponding stay application No.183/Coch/2023 is dismissed as rendered infructuous. Ordered accordingly. A copy of the common order be placed in the respective case files.
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Priya, Townhall Road, Cuttack vs. Superintendent Cuttack- I Range, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026