M/S.AGREENCO FIBRE FOAM P. LTD,KANNUR vs. THE DCIT CIRCLE 1, KANNUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 46/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 August 2024AY 2007-08Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI AMARJIT SINGH (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay, noting that the NFAC's order did not decide the substantive grounds on merits. The appeal was restored to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal for AY 2007-2008 was dismissed ex-parte by the NFAC due to the assessee's non-appearance. The assessee faced a significant delay in filing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC properly adjudicated the substantive grounds of appeal on merits, and if the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6),Section 154

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: 20.08.2024Pronounced: 22.08.2024

This assessee’s appeal, for the assessment year 2007- 2008, arise against the CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”], Delhi, Delhi’s DIN & Order no.ITBA/NFAC/ S/250/2022-23/1047913715(1), dated 09.12.2022, in proceedings u/sec.154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the "Act").

2 ITA.No.46/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 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. Smt. Swarnalatha, 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 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.

Delay of 4029 days condoned in light of Collector Land 3. Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) settling the issue long back that that all such technical aspects must make way for the cause of substantial justice the delay is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication.

3 ITA.No.46/COCH./2023 4. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 22.08.2024.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →