MOHAMED JAZEEL PARAMBATH ASHRAF,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO NON CORP WARD 2(4) & TPS, KOCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 49/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 September 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the NFAC for fresh adjudication on merits. The NFAC was directed to provide at least three effective opportunities of hearing to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A)-NFAC was dismissed due to a delay of over 170 days. The CIT(A)'s order did not adjudicate the substantive grounds of appeal on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) properly adjudicated the appeal on merits when it was dismissed solely on grounds of delay. The need for substantive justice over technical delays.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

Hearing: 21.08.2024Pronounced: 12.09.2024

This assessee’s appeal, for the assessment year 2017- 2018, arise against the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”], Delhi, Delhi’s DIN & Order no.ITBA/NFAC/ S/250/2022-23/1047289250(1), dated 15.11.2022, in proceedings u/sec.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1971 (in short the "Act").

2 ITA.No.49/COCH./2023 Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

2.

Delay of 02 days in filing the appeal before the tribunal in light of Hon’ble apex court’s landmark decision Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) has settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice.

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the learned CIT(A)-NFAC has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground of more than 170 days delay. The Revenue 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 this situation, we 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 plead and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

3 ITA.No.49/COCH./2023 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 12.09.2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →