AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1718
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shna Mohan Mishra, Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate Mr. Prasoon Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Ms. Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi, Senior SC Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate Ms. Richa Rajeev, Advocate ORAL JUDGMENT (PER: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Department of Income Tax. 2. The petitioner in the present writ application has prayed for the following reliefs:- "i. To issue appropriate writs/orders and/or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the order dated 27.11.2024 (annexure-P/1) whereby and where under the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2016-17 showing therein 'NIL taxable income' as the income of the petitioner was exempted from levy of tax. The return was selected for scrutiny under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'I.T. Act'). Pursuant to the notice, the petitioner appeared before the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer passed an order of assessment against the petitioner and a demand of Rs. 45,43,423/- has been raised. Notice of demand under Section 156 of the I.T. Act is Annexure 'P/4' to the writ application. 4. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a writ application being CWJC No. 1778 of 2019 before this Court wherein the validity of assessment and creation of demand were questioned. The said writ application was disposed of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1. The petitioner has pointed out in paragraph '9' of the writ application that on perusal of Form 35 (Memo of Appeal) filed online on Income Tax portal, it would appear that in Row Nos. 14 and 15 of Form 35, the appellant has briefly stated regarding delay in filing of the appeal and also referred Writ Petition No. 1778 of 2019 filed before the High Court and SLP (C) No. 11840 of 2019 filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 7. It is the case of the petitioner that the appeal filed by the petitioner remained pending since June, 2019 and in the meantime, the I.T. Act was amended and the case of the petitioner was transferred to the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC). Pursuant to the notice under Section 250 of the I.T. Act from the NF....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Authority is liable to be quashed and the petitioner is entitled for cost of litigation. Stand of the Respondents 11. A counter affidavit has been filed in which while answering paragraph '13' of the writ application, statements have been made in paragraph '9' of the counter affidavit. There is no denial of the fact that the petitioner had filed an application seeking condonation of delay. The stand of the Respondents is that the Hon'ble High Court had not granted any period of limitation but only stated that since the matter before the Court has taken away the period of limitation, he was allowed four weeks time to file appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) who will consider and dispose of the same in accordance with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hysical hearing to the petitioner. Consideration 14. This Court having noticed the submissions hereinabove, has no hesitation in recording that this seems to be a case of gross negligence if not a case of dereliction in duty. The CIT (A) at NAFC who passed the order has acted without looking into the records. At such a high position where he is required to consider each and every aspect of the matter in appeal, it is difficult to believe that an officer at his level would act in such a manner that it would result in causing hardship to the assessee and multiply the litigation. This Court is confining it's observations with regard to the order impugned in the present writ application only. 15. In the admitted position, this Court se....