POWERRICH ENIGINEERING COMPANY,MALAPPURAM V. ITO, WARD 1 & TPS, TIRUR

ITA 477/COCH/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Powerrich Engineering Company, a partnership firm engaged in contract business in Oman, which filed an appeal against the order of the National Faceless Centre, Delhi, for the Assessment Year 2018-19. The firm had filed a return disclosing a loss, which was contested by the Assessing Officer who disallowed a significant payment. The initial appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had erred in dismissing the appeal without a detailed discussion on merits, as required under section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal referenced a decision by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court emphasizing the need for a merits-based decision even in ex-parte cases.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 713026 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• 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: PREETHA R SHENOY; FILING AFFIDAVIT SEEKING CONDONATION OF DELAY
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM ITA No. 477/Coch/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Powerrich Engineering Company, .......... Appellant Mala House, Door No.21, Near Irikulam Madrasa, Kanntipadi B.O., Vengara, Malappuram. [PAN: AAOFP 4129 P] vs. Assessing Officer .......... Respondent Tariff Bazar, Town Hadd Road, Tirur, Malappuram. Appellant by: Ms. Preetha R Shenoy, CA Respondent by: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 31.07.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 26.09.2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2018-19. 2. Brief facts of the case are that assessee is a partnership firm engaged in contract business in Sultanate of Oman. The return of Printed from counselvise.com 2 ITA No. 676/Coch/2024 Meat Products of India Ltd. income for the A.Y. 2018-19 was filed disclosing loss of Rs. 46,26,405/-. Against the said return of income, assessment was completed by the AO vide order dated 31/05/2021 passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) by disallowing the payment of Rs. 39,57,531/-. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non- prosecution. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal with delay of 209 days. 5. The assessee by filing affidavit seeking condonation of delay on the ground that Head Accountant who was looking-after the tax matters suffered severe illness and was bedridden. Hence, the delay is not willful or deliberate. Therefore, it is prayed that the delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for adjudication. For the reasons stated in the affidavit, I condone the delay of 209 days and admit the appeal for hearing. 6. 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 ex-parte, is duty bound to dispose of the appeal on merits. Reliance in this Printed from counselvise.com 3 ITA No. 676/Coch/2024 Meat Products of India Ltd. 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 a direction to dispose of the appeal de novo on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 31st July, 2025. Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cochin, Dated: 31st July, 2025 vr/- 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 Printed from counselvise.com "