SHREE HARIKRUSHNA WELFARE TRUST,BHACHAU-KUTCH vs. THE DCIT/ACIT (CPC), BANAGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal set aside the ex parte orders of the NFAC and remanded the matters back for fresh adjudication. The NFAC is directed to provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee and to independently decide on the condonation of delay.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed appeals with a significant delay, and the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) dismissed them ex parte without condoning the delay. The assessee claimed an adjournment application was not considered.
What were the issues?
Whether the NFAC erred in dismissing the appeals ex parte without considering the adjournment application and whether the delay in filing the appeals should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “RAJKOT” BENCH, RAJKOT
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED&
O R D E R
PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM:
The instant two appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against the orders both dated 16.11.2021 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, arising out of the assessment orders dated 03.01.2018 & 25.03.2019 passed by the DCIT, CPC, Bengaluru under Section & 08/Rjt/2022 [Shree Harikrushna Welfare Trust vs. ACIT(CPC)] A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18 - 2- 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as to ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2016-17 & 2017-18.
There is delay in filing the instant appeals for 2 years 5 months & 1 year 2 months, respectively. Before the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, the delay was not condoned in both the matters. It is the case of the assessee as submitted by the Ld. AR before us that the adjournment application was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC. However, that was not considered and ultimately final order rejecting the appeal preferred by the assessee was passed.
On the contrary, the Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC rejecting the appeal, since, matter was fixed on three occasions and the assessee did not appear before the First Appellate Authority.
We have heard the respective parties and perused the materials available on record including the orders passed by the authorities below. Admittedly the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC dismissed the appeal ex parte. It is also a fact that assessee was given opportunity on three occasions but none appeared except adjournment application barring 1 or 2 occasions. However, the appellant could not ventilate his grievance before the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC as the order being an ex parte one and therefore, in order to prevent the miscarriage of justice, we would like to give a further opportunity of being heard to the appellant by the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC. We also make it clear that we are not giving any observation on the delay aspect in preferring the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC. We set aside the issue to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC to adjudicate the same afresh upon giving opportunity of being heard to the appellant and upon considering the evidence which the appellant may choose & 08/Rjt/2022 [Shree Harikrushna Welfare Trust vs. ACIT(CPC)] A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18 - 3- to file at the time of appellate proceeding. The Ld. CIT(A) NFAC will also take an independent call on the point of delay as we are not adjudicating this aspect here. Hence, the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC is directed to deal with the delay aspect and to pass order accordingly.
In the combined result, assessee’s both appeals are allowed for statistical purposes
This Order pronounced on 30/08/2023
Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (MADHUMITA ROY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 30/08/2023 S. K. SINHA True Copy आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Kniit Net Industries Private Limited, Khurda vs. Superintendent Of CGST And Central Excise, Bhubaneswar Ii CircleOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Swarnapai Chemicals (Opc) Private Limited, Cuttack vs. Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack IOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S. Middlex, Puri vs. Commnr. Of State Tax, Banijyakar Bhawan, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Sunadei Indane Gramin Vitrak, Nayagarh vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, Cuttack, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Sunanda Raul vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods Nad Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 14 Oct 2026