ANEAK KOYA VALAPPIL,KOZHIKODE V. .THE ITO WARD 1(1), KOZHIKODE

ITA 425/COCH/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Aneak Koya Valappil, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (CIT(A)), which confirmed the assessment made by the Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Kozhikode. The assessment was related to the Assessment Year 2007-08, where the appellant had not filed a return of income. The AO had information about a sale agreement executed by the appellant and his brother, which led to the belief that income had escaped taxation. Consequently, a notice under section 148 was issued, and an assessment was made adding a significant amount as long-term capital gain from the sale of property. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution without examining the merits, leading to the current appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474730 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-12-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 30-05-2023
• Other Referred Cases: PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra 279 CTR 614
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL
• Assessee Lawyers: PARVATHI AMMAL
• Section: 148; 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JM ITA No. 425/Coch/2023 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Aneak Koya Valappil Baputty Mandiram Hospital Road Calicut 673001 [PAN: ALGPK8935M] .......... Appellant Vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward - 1(1), Kozhikode .......... Respondent Appellant by: Smt. Parvathi Ammal, CA Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 21.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 09.12.2024 O R D E R Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 30.03.2023 for Assessment Year (AY) 2007-08. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, had not filed return of income for AY 2007-08 under the provisions of section 134 of the 2 ITA No. 425/Coch/2023 Aneak Koya Valappil Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Kozhikode (hereinafter “the AO”) had received an information that Shri K.V. Aneak, Baputty Mandiram along with this brother K.V. Arun had executed a sale agreement dated 22.09.2006 with Shri K.P. Madhukrishnan for sale of property owned by them at Kalathikunnu Desom of Kozhikode Corporation for total consideration of Rs. 1,59,87,000/-. Thus, he formed an opinion that income escaped to tax. A notice u/s. 148 was issued on 18.03.2014. In response to the said notice, assessee filed return of income showing a total income of Rs. 2,04,2909/-. Against the said return of income, the AO completed assessment u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act at a total income of Rs. 62,41,747/- making an addition of Rs. 58,27,029/- towards long term capital gain on sale of property. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Form the perusal of the impugned order it is found that the CIT(A), had merely dismissed the appeal for non prosecution without going into the merits of the case. It is the settled position of law that the CIT(A), even while disposing of the appeal exparte, is duty bound to dispose of the appeal on merits. Reliance in this regard can be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra 279 CTR 614. Therefore, in the light of the above legal position we are of the 3 ITA No. 425/Coch/2023 Aneak Koya Valappil considered view that the matter required to be remanded to the file of the CIT(A) with the direction to dispose of the appeal de novo on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 9th December, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (PRAKASH CHAND YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 9th December, 2024 n.p. Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The Pr. CIT concerned 4. The Sr. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard File By Order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Cochin "