VIKAS LAXMAN CHAUDHARI,JALGAON vs. ITO WARD 1(3) JALGAON, JALGAON
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that the NFAC's dismissal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits was unreasonable. The matter was remanded back to the NFAC for disposal on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return declaring Nil income and agriculture income. The Assessing Officer made an addition of Rs. 20,33,500/- on account of cash deposits. The appeal before the NFAC was dismissed for non-prosecution.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC erred by dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution instead of adjudicating on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “SMC”, PUNE
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessee by : Shri Vinay Kawdia Revenue by : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date of hearing : 30.04.2024 Date of pronouncement : 30.04.2024 आदेश / ORDER
PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 23.12.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18.
Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual The Return of Income for the assessment year 2017-18 was filed declaring total income of Rs.Nil and agriculture income at Rs.2,07,472/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 16.12.2019 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’). While doing so, the Assessing Officer had made addition of Rs.20,33,500/- being the cash deposits in the bank account. 3. Being aggrieved by the above additions, an appeal was filed before the NFAC, who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution without going into the merits of the issue in appeal. 4. Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. We heard both the parties and perused the material on record. From perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the NFAC while passing the ex-parte order had not adjudicated the issue raised in appeal on merits, instead the NFAC dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution of appeal. This approach of the NFAC is totally unreasonable and unjustified. The NFAC fell in serious error by not adjudicating the issues in appeal on merits. The settled positions of law mandates the NFAC to dispose of the appeal by adjudicating the issue raised in appeal on merits. In the present case, the NFAC had fell into serious error by not disposing of the appeal on merits. Therefore, we vacate this finding of the NFAC. In the circumstances, we remand the matter back to the file of the NFAC and direct to dispose of the appeal on merits in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 30th day of April, 2024.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Mascot Constructions Co. And Another vs. The Commissioner Of Goods And Services Tax (GST) And AnotherBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Ankil Jagdishchandra Kholwadwala vs. Union Of INDIA And AnrBombay · 22 Oct 2026
- Fasil Hussain Shah vs. Ut Of J And K Th Commissioner Secretary TO Government Finance Department And OthersJammu and Kashmir and Ladakh · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S. Devkinandan Traders vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- M/S Dixit Medical Agencies vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026