BAY SHORE PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. ITO CORP WARD 1(1), KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 192/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 September 2024AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had not decided the assessee's substantive grounds on merits as required by law. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2011-2012 was against the CIT(A)'s order which confirmed the Assessing Officer's order. The assessee did not appear before the ITAT, and the appeal was proceeded ex-parte.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the substantive grounds of appeal on merits as required by Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

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: 21.08.2024Pronounced: 25.09.2024

PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal, for assessment year 2011- 2012, arise against the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1048593339(1), dated 10.01.2023, in proceedings u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

1.

2 ITA.No.192/COCH./2023 Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the CIT(A) has simply confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer in the lower appellate proceedings before rejecting the assessee’s contentions on merits.. Learned DR could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the CIT(A)’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), for his 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.

3.

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

3 ITA.No.192/COCH./2023 Order pronounced in the open Court on 25.09.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →