What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the NFAC failed to adjudicate the substantive grounds of appeal as required by law. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the NFAC for fresh adjudication.

The assessee's appeal for AY 2015-2016 was against an order by the NFAC. The assessee did not appear before the NFAC, which confirmed the Assessing Officer's order without deciding the substantive grounds on merits.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC properly adjudicated the substantive grounds of appeal on merits. Whether the NFAC's order was in compliance with the procedural requirements of the Income Tax Act.

Anupkumar Rathi, Nagrpur vs Centralized Processing Center… | ITAT Nagpur 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGOUR

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA

Hearing: 26.03.2024Pronounced: 22.04.2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR “SMC” BENCH : NAGOUR [THROUGH VIRTUAL HEARING AT ITAT : PUNE] BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.70/NAG./2023 Assessment Year 2015-2016 Shri Anupkumar Dhanrajji Rathi, S4, Krishna Vihar-III, The A.O. CPC, Isasani Tq Hingna, Nagpur. Income Tax Department, vs. PIN – 440 016. Bengaluru. Karnataka State Maharashtra. PAN AENPR2589E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 22.04.2024 ORDER

This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2015-2016 arise against the National Faceless Appeal Centre [in short the “NFAC”] Delhi’s Din and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1049026315(1) dated 23.01.2023, involving proceedings u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. He is accordingly proceeded ex-parte.

It emerges during the course of hearing that the NFAC has noted the assessee’s continuous non-appearance in the lower appellate proceedings and confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer vide impugned order under challenge. Shri Marathe could hardly dispute the clinching fact that the NFAC’s order has nowhere

2 ITA.No.70/NAG./2023 decided the assessee’s substantive ground 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, I 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 file and prove all the relevant facts in consequential proceedings. Ordered accordingly.

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

Order pronounced in the open Court on 22.04.2024.

ANUPKUMAR RATHI,NAGRPUR vs. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTER, BANGALORE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments