PRECIOUS TRANSPORT SERVICE,KOCHI vs. THE ITO (TDS), KOCHI

The appeal is delayed by 8 days, which is suitably explained per a sworn affidavit dated 23.11.2023 by Shri Daya Ram Singh, Managing Partner of the appellant-firm. Hearing was, admitting the appeal, accordingly proceeded with.

At the outset, it was explained by Sri Rao, the learned counsel for the assessee, that the impugned order is void in law inasmuch as the assessee’s appeal against it’s impugned assessment dated 24.3.2011 (for AY 2004-05) stands already disposed of by the CIT(A)-3, Kochi vide it’s order dated 17.10.2016 (copy on record). That is, the ITANo. 969/Coch/2022 (AY: 2004-05) Precious Transport Servicevs. ITO impugned order decides a non-existing appeal, which also explains the assessee’s non-response to the hearing notices before the first appellate authority.

We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. We have, in confirmation of the assessee’s averments, besides the section/s under which the assessment order is passed; its date, also compared the number of the Appeal filed by the assessee before the first appellate authority, and the date of its institution, as indeed the tax demand, to find them in total agreement. The assessee’s appeal stands since disposed of by the first appellate authority on 17/10/2016 and, as it appears, there has occurred an error in the migration of the appeal to the NFAC. The assessee ought to have, rather than not responding, clarified matters to the ld. CIT(A). The impugned order is, nevertheless, null and void. We hold accordingly.