KARADEN PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPERS,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, KOZHIKODE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 92/COCH/2024Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024AY 2014-2015Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without addressing the facts and framing points of determination. Therefore, the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2014-15 was filed against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's additions under sections 69/69A without properly dealing with the factual matrix.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a valid ex-parte order without considering the factual matrix and framing points of determination as required by law.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69,Section 69A,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: Shri Shameem Ahamed, Advocate
For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Hearing: 19.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2014-15 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/ NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1058590381(1) dated 08.12.2023 in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

Heard both 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 it’s exparte order against the assessee confirming the Assessing Officer’s action making section 69/69A addition(s) etc., 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 discussion Karaden Properties and Developers thereupon. 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 relevant facts within three effective opportunities of hearing in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

3.

Delay of 02 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned as per assessee’s solemn averments in condonation petition.

4.

This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

More judgments on Section 69

All 9,011 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →