AYYAPPA ROLLER MILLS LTD.,KOCHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,CORPORATE WARD 1(1), KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 725/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 September 2024AY 2012-13Bench: 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 properly dealing with the factual matrix and without framing points of determination as required by Section 250(6). Therefore, the issue was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 was filed against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A)/NFAC. The CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer's disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(i).

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) passed a valid ex-parte order by failing to address the factual matrix and frame points of determination as mandated by the Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,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

For Appellant: Shri Abhiram Sunish, Advocate
For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Hearing: 16.08.2024Pronounced: 25.09.2024

Appellant by: Shri Abhiram Sunish, Advocate Respondent by: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR Date of Hearing: 16.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 25.09.2024 O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2012-13 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/ NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/10551500330(1) dated 16.08.2023 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 exparte order confirming the Assessing Officer’s action making section 14A r.w.r. 8D(2)(i) disallowance without dealing with the relevant factual matrix as contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act requiring him to frame Ayyappa Roller Flour Mills Ltd. points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereon. Faced with this situation, we deem it fit appropriate to restore the issue back to the CIT(A) 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 related facts within three effective opportunities of hearing at it’s risk and responsibility, in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →