MANSOR FOODS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,COCHIN V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CORPORATE WARD 1(1), KOCHI

ITA 996/COCH/2024

AI Insights

Mansor Foods India Pvt. Ltd., engaged in the restaurant business, filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), which had dismissed their earlier appeal ex parte for non-prosecution. The original assessment by the Income Tax Officer (ITO) included an addition of Rs. 1,94,87,412 as unaccounted import value, leading to a total assessed income of Rs. 79,85,100 for the Assessment Year 2022-23. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without merit consideration, relying on precedents that allowed dismissal for non-prosecution. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) erred by not addressing the appeal on its merits, as required under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 474695 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2022-2023
• 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
• Keywords: Condonation of delay; Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA No. 996/Coch/2024 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Mansor Foods India Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant Door o. 43/3310A, Thammanam Puthiya Road , Kailas Nagar, Kochi 682025 [PAN: AAKCM7705M] vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Corporate Ward 1(1), Kochi Appellant by: ------- None ------- Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 05.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 19.02.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 03.10.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2022-23. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of running a restaurant. The return of income for AY 2022-23 was filed on 30.11.2022. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward- 1(1), Kochi (hereinafter called \"the AO\") vide order dated 22.03.2024 passed u/s. 143(3) w.r.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at a 2 ITA No. 996/Coch/2024 Mansor Foods India Pvt. Ltd. total income of Rs. 79,85,100/-. While doing so the AO made addition on account of unaccounted import value of Rs. 1,94,87,412/-. 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 appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. 5. At the outset, I find that there is a delay of 7 days in filing the present appeal. The appellant filed a petition along with an affidavit seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal, wherein it is stated that the delay had occurred due to technical issues encountered on the portal of the ITAT. Therefore, the delay is not wilful or deliberate. Hence, it is prayed that the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for adjudication. On a perusal of the averments made in the condonation petition, it is evident that the appellant is prevented by reasonable cause from filing the appeal. Therefore, I condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 6. When the appeal was called on nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing. Therefore, I proceeded to dispose of the appeal after hearing the learned Sr. DR. 3 ITA No. 996/Coch/2024 Mansor Foods India Pvt. Ltd. 7. I find that the learned CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non prosecution. As contemplated u/s. 250(6) of the Act the CIT(A) is required to frame points of determination followed by a detailed discussion thereupon before passing the order. 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 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. Ordered accordingly. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes 9. Order pronounced in the open court on 19th February, 2025. Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 19th February, 2025 n.p. 4 ITA No. 996/Coch/2024 Mansor Foods India Pvt. Ltd. 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 "