Veeyemar & Co vs Income Tax Officer
2026 Latest Caselaw 2706 Ker

Kerala High Court

Veeyemar & Co vs Income Tax Officer on 8 April, 2026

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

                                                      2026:KER:31589



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                   &
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
 WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL 2026 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1948
                         ITA NO. 48 OF 2026

APPELLANT/APPELLANT:

         VEEYEMAR & CO., AGED 57 YEARS
         12/1059, BIG BAZAAR, CALICUT 673001,
         KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,
         M AHAMED BASHA, S/O. LATE ABDUL RAHIM,
         PIN 673 001

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.K.M.FIROZ
         SHRI.JAMEEL AHAMMED M.S.


RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

         INCOME TAX OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER
         OF INCOME TAX NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT
         CENTRE (NFAC), C BLOCK, 4TH FLOOR, CIVIC
         CENTRE, MINTO ROAD, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110002

         BY ADVS.
         SHRI.G.KEERTHIVAS, ADDITIONAL STANDING COUNSEL,
         INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT
         SHRI.HARIKUMAR G. (GOPINATHAN NAIR), ADDITIONAL
         STANDING COUNSEL, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT


     THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.04.2026,     THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
                                                             2026:KER:31589
ITA 48/26
                                      2

                              JUDGMENT

Devan Ramachandran, J.

Since we propose to dispose of this Appeal, on account of

technical reasons, it is not necessary for us either to admit it or to

frame substantial questions of law.

2. The reason for us to say as afore is because, it is the

specific assertion of the appellant that they were not issued with

any notice by the learned Tribunal, before it issued the impugned

order.

3. Hearing Sri.K.M.Firoz - learned counsel for the

appellant as afore, we passed an order on 01.04.2026, to the

following effect.

Read order dated 25.03.2026.

In view of the assertion of the appellant that he was not issued with notice at any point of time by the learned Tribunal, we deem it necessary to obtain clarification on that issue.

We, therefore direct the Registrar of the Tribunal to inform the Registry of this Court, the manner in which notice was served on the appellant and copies of the endorsement to show the same. The report shall be obtained through phone/e-mail.

Post on 08.04.2026.

4. The learned Tribunal has made available its report, the 2026:KER:31589

relevant portion of which is extracted under:

With reference to the above it is intimated that, on careful verification with reference to the contention raised by the appellant before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, the office copy of the hearing notice dated 30/05/2025 is seen on record. It is also intimated that Defect Memo dated 20/05/2025 was issued to the concerned parties regarding non furnishing of E-mail id and other 06 defects. The case was posted for hearing on 02/06/2025 as directed by Hon'ble Accountant Member Shri. Inturi Rama Rao. Subsequently notice was generated-on 30/05/2025 for the posting on 02/06/2025. As the email ID was not furnished despite issuance of the defect memo, the hearing notice could not be served through email. Further, due to the short notice period for fixing the hearing, the notice may not have been served by post.

5. It is thus indubitable and obvious that, whatever be the

reason, the appellant had not been heard by the learned Tribunal

before the impugned order had been issued.

6. We are, therefore, certain that we will be justified in

remitting the Appeal to the learned Tribunal for fresh

consideration, fixing a time frame for the appellant to appear.

In the afore scenario, we allow this Appeal and set aside the

impugned order of the learned Tribunal, however, clarifying that

we have not entered into the merits of any of the rival 2026:KER:31589

contentions, thus directing the learned Tribunal to reconsider ITA

No.370/Coch/2025, after affording the appellant necessary

opportunity to be heard, to culminate in an appropriate order

thereon, as expeditiously as is possible.

In order to obtain an expeditious compliance of the afore

directions and to avoid any further complaint, we direct the

appellant to mark appearance before the learned Tribunal at 11

A.M. on 30.04.2026.

Needless to say, until such time as the learned Tribunal takes

up the matter and issue any further orders thereon, all coercive

action against the appellant based on the orders of assessment and

appellate orders, shall stand deferred.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI JUDGE RR 2026:KER:31589

APPENDIX OF ITA NO. 48 OF 2026

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 DATED 27.9.2021 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI Annexure B A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.

ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1075575470 (1) DATED 9.4.2025 BY TEH BY THE NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC) Annexure C A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.7.2025 IN ITA NO. 370/COCH/2025 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-18 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH Annexure D A TRUE COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 18.12.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2016- 17 PASSED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO.1(4), KOZHIKODE AGAINST THE APPELLANT