Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

NFAC Order Set Aside for Ignoring Written Submissions & Failure to Record Reasons

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2025 taxguru.in 10097
Case Name
Sonali Mahendra Naik Gaunekar Shivoham Vs ITO (ITAT Panaji)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2016-17
Advertisement


Sonali Mahendra Naik Gaunekar Shivoham Vs ITO (ITAT Panaji)

FAC Order Set Aside for Ignoring Written Submissions- Failure to Record Reasons Vitiates NFAC Order- Natural Justice Violated: ITAT Panaji Quashes NFAC Order Passed Without Considering Assessee’s Documents

Assessee challenged the NFAC order dt. 23/09/2025 passed u/s 250, which upheld reassessment made u/s 147 r.w.s. 263 determining income at ₹ 9.81 crores.

The case stemmed from a reopening notice u/s 148 dt. 19/02/2020, where AO invoked s. 50C to tax difference between sale consideration & stamp-duty value. Though the PCIT had earlier set aside the initial reassessment u/s 263 for inadequate enquiry, the subsequent reassessment considered DVO’s valuation report, yet the NFAC dismissed Assessee’s appeal, alleging non-submission of supporting evidence for cost of acquisition & improvement.

Before Tribunal, Assessee submitted that detailed written submissions along with voluminous documentary evidence were filed online on 18/09/2025, much prior to NFAC’s order dt. 23/09/2025, but these were ignored altogether. The Revenue could not controvert this factual position.

Tribunal’s Observations

The Bench observed that the NFAC:

  • Adjudicated twelve grounds together & dismissed them blanketly, without assigning any reason or independent finding.
  • Failed to consider written submissions & evidences filed online, constituting a clear violation of principles of natural justice.
  • Did not comply with the mandatory requirement of s/s (6) of s. 250, which obligates the first appellate authority to state (i) points for determination, (ii) decision thereon, & (iii) reasons for decision.

Tribunal relied on precedents: Grasim Industries Ltd v. CCIT (2024) 302 Taxman 194 (Bom), Vijay S Kulkarni v. ITAT Pune (2025) 171 Taxmann.com 696, Chandra Kishore Jha v. Mahavir Prasad (1999) 8 SCC 266 (SC), Computer Science Corp. India (P) Ltd v. DCIT (2024) 163 Taxmann.com 693- All holding that orders passed without dealing with submissions or giving reasons are invalid & violative of natural justice.

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Author Info

CA Vijayakumar Shetty
Qualification: CA in Practice
Company: Shetty & Co, Chartered Accountants, Mangalore
Location: Mangalore, Karnataka
Articles Published: 6,128

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.