Case Law Details
Selvalakshmi Feeds & Farms Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
The case of Selvalakshmi Feeds & Farms Vs ITO involved an appeal against the ex parte order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], dated June 13, 2024, for the assessment year 2018-19. The main grievance was that the CIT(A) passed the order without addressing the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Chennai noted that the CIT(A) had based the ex parte order on the assessee’s lack of response to notices issued on February 13, 2024, and February 26, 2024. However, the assessee contended that these notices were not received. The tribunal observed that the CIT(A) had not adhered to the requirements of Section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, which mandates a speaking order addressing the grounds of appeal.
Consequently, the ITAT set aside the impugned order and remanded the appeal back to the CIT(A) for a fresh adjudication. The tribunal directed the CIT(A) to pass a detailed order in compliance with the law after considering the submissions and documents the assessee pledged to provide, including an updated email ID for future communication.
The ITAT allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the importance of addressing substantive grounds in appeal proceedings. The order was pronounced on December 4, 2024, in Chennai.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT CHENNAI
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter in short “the Ld.CIT(A)”), Delhi, dated 13.06.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter in short “AY”) 2018-19.
2. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) /AO passing an ex parte order without going into the merits of the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee.
3. Having gone through the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A)/NFAC, we note that the Ld.CIT(A) has passed an ex parte order finding that there was no response from the assessee even though the matter was fixed twice on 13.02.2024 & 26.02.2024. The Ld.AR submitted that the assessee didn’t receive the two notices as referred to by the Ld.CIT(A) in the impugned order. Be that as it may, it is noted that the Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds of appeal in accordance with sub-section (6) of section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Therefore, we are inclined to set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the appeal back to his file with a direction to decide the grounds of appeal in accordance to law by passing a speaking order. The Ld.AR of the assessee has undertaken that he will furnish the correct e-mail ID and would file the written submissions/relevant documents supporting the grounds of appeal raised by him and the Ld.CIT(A) to pass order in accordance to law after hearing the assessee.
4. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 04th day of December, 2024, in Chennai.
Author Bio
