DEV FUELS(MAVUNGAL AGENCIES)A,KANHANGAD V. ITO, KASARGOD

ITA 707/COCH/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Dev Fuels (Mavungal Agencies), a firm operating a petrol pump, which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 30.11.2023 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The appellant had filed a return declaring a total income of Rs. 2,07,880, which was significantly increased to Rs. 33,20,835 by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kasaragod, due to an addition of Rs. 31,12,955. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte for non-prosecution, citing precedents including a decision from the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Chemipol vs. Union of India. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) erred in not addressing the appeal on merits, despite it being dismissed for non-prosecution, and thus remanded the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough examination on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474706 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Other Referred Cases: M/s. Chemipol vs. Union of India, PCIT vs. Premkumar Arjundas Luthra
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA No. 707/Coch/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Dev Fuels (Mavungal Agencies) .......... Appellant Mavungal Anandashram, Main Road Kanhangad, Kasaragod 671531 [PAN: AADFM9425E] vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward -2 .......... Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Kasaragod Appellant by: ------- None ------- Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 17.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 22.01.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 30.11.2023 for Assessment Year (AY) 2014-15. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a firm running a petro pump. The appellant filed the return of income for AY 2014- 15 on 20.01.2016 declaring total income of Rs. 2,07,880/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kasaragod (hereinafter called \"the AO\") vide order dated 19.12.2016 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income 2 ITA No. 707/Coch/2024 Dev Fuels (Mavungal Agencies) Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at a total income of Rs. 33,20,835/-. While doing so, the AO addition of Rs. 31,12,955/-. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal exparte for non prosecution placing on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Chemipol vs. Union of India in Excise Appeal No. 62 of 2009 and a few other orders. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal in the present appeal. The learned A.R. has filed a letter seeking adjournment on the ground the senior partner of the CA firm is out of country. The request for adjournment is declined, as the matter can be disposed of without entering into the merits, as the CIT(A) has disposed of the appeal without entering into the merits of the case. 5. I heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. I find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non prosecution. 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 I am of the considered view that the matter requires to be remanded to the 3 ITA No. 707/Coch/2024 Dev Fuels (Mavungal Agencies) 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 22nd January, 2025. Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 22nd January, 2025 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 "