CHERYL SAVIA INDIRA LOBO,CALANGUTE V. ACIT, C-1(1), PANAJI, PANAJI

ITA 275/PAN/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Cheryl Savia Indira Lobo, the appellant, who contested an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) regarding the assessment of her income for the year 2016-17. The NFAC had dismissed her appeal ex-parte due to non-prosecution, which led her to approach the ITAT. The primary contention was the improper handling of her appeal by the NFAC, which allegedly failed to address the merits of her case and did not provide a reasoned decision as mandated by the law. The ITAT agreed with the appellant, noting the NFAC's failure to comply with procedural requirements under section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and thus set aside the NFAC's order, directing a new hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26300 (ITAT-PANAJI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-03-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: WT(D)
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Other Referred Cases: Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr, Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NAZEERA MOHAMMAD LD.
• Assessee Lawyers: VINOD TOTEKAR LD.
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, PANAJI ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 4 BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. 275/PAN/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Cheryl Savia Indira Lobo H.No. E-100, Pobha Vado, Calangute, Bardez, North Goa, Goa PAN : ACBPL9307J . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee by : Mr Vinod Totekar [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by : Smt Nazeera Mohammad [‘Ld. DR’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of conclusive Hearing : 11/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 12/03/2025 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; The captioned appeal of the assessee impugns DIN & Order ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064290058(1) dt. 23/04/2024 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. NFAC’ hereinafter] u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] which in turn arisen out of order of assessment dt. 27/12/2018 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act by the Asstt. Commission of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Panaji Goa [‘Ld. AO’ hereinafter] anent to assessment year 2016-17 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. Cheryl Savia Indra Lobo Vs ACIT ITA Nos.275/PAN/2024 AY: 2016-17 ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 4 2. After vouching the sufficiency of reasons explained, we are satisfied that the appellant was for sufficient cause prevented from filing present appeal against the impugned order and the case of the assessee falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)]. In view thereof the undeliberate delay of 135 days occurred in instituting present appeal after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice we condone the delay and advanced for adjudication. 3. Tersely stated facts of the case are that; the assessee is an individual who for the year under consideration filed return on 14/10/2016 declaring total income of ₹25,08,240/-. The return of income was selected for scrutiny and the consequential assessment was completed by bringing to tax entire amount of consideration of ₹25.00Lakhs received against extinguishment of tenancy right as the income of the assessee under the head income of other sources as against the assessee claim for capital gain. The resultant exemption claimed by the assessee u/s 54E of the Act also turn down tenaciously. Cheryl Savia Indra Lobo Vs ACIT ITA Nos.275/PAN/2024 AY: 2016-17 ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 4 4. Aggrieved by the assessment the assessee instituted an appeal thereagainst before Ld. NFAC, which also came to be dismissed ex- parte owning to non-prosecution and in the absence of evidences. 5. Aggrieved by impugned ex-parte order, the assessee came in present appeals challenging the proceedings first on the ground of violation of principle of nature justice later on its merits. 6. Without touching grounds raised in appeal memo and merits of the case; we have heard the rival parties on the limited issue of non- prosecution & resultant ex-parte dismissal of first appeals and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused material placed on record, considered the facts in the light of settled legal position. 7. We note that, while exercising jurisdiction u/s 251(1)(a) of the Act, Ld. NFAC is required to state point of determination, decision thereon and reasons therefore in terms of section 250(6) of the Act. A plain reading of above section reveals that, it was incumbent upon Ld. NFAC to make necessary enquiries before passing an order and while doing so it necessitates to deal with each issue/ground on merits even in ex-parte proceedings. Cheryl Savia Indra Lobo Vs ACIT ITA Nos.275/PAN/2024 AY: 2016-17 ITAT-Panaji Page 4 of 4 8. Per contra it is found in the instant case that, in the event of non- prosecution the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal simply by reiterating the findings of Ld. AO but without adjudicating in terms of s/s (6) of section 250 of the Act. The impugned adjudication since inconsonance with above provision (supra), therefore we find no reasons in not setting-aside the impugned order at the stage of its institution with a direction for de-novo adjudication in accordance with law and pass a speaking order. Ordered Accordingly. 9. The appeal in result stands allowed for statistical purposes. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 the order pronounced in the open court on date mentioned herein before. -S/d- -S/d- PAVAN KUMAR GADALE G. D. PADMAHSHALI JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Panaji/Dt: 12th March, 2025. Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)/NFAC Concerned 4. PCIT Concerned 5. DR, ITAT, Panaji Bench, Panaji 6. Guard File By Order, Sr. Private Secretary / AR ITAT, Panaji. "