SRI. BRAHMATANTRA SWATANTRA PARAKALASWAMY TRUST,MYSORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS, WARD, MYSORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 607/BANG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 October 2023AY 2016-173 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the assessee's explanation for non-representation to be bonafide and, in the interest of justice, decided to give the assessee a chance to represent its case. The matter was restored to the CIT(Appeals) for a fresh decision after providing a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(Appeals) against an order under Section 154. Due to a change in management, the assessee lost track of the appeal and failed to respond to multiple notices from the CIT(Appeals). Consequently, the CIT(Appeals) passed an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(Appeals) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without considering the assessee's bonafide reasons for non-representation.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 154,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLIA, JUDIIAL MEMBER & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri Vinaya Simha, CA
For Respondent: Shri Parithivel, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Hearing: 11.10.2023Pronounced: 11.10.2023

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member

1.

This appeal is filed by the assessee challenging the DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1053843067(1) dated 21.6.2023 of the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [NFAC], for the AY 2016-17.

2.

The ld. AR submitted that consequent to the order u/s. 154 dated 9.5.2019 passed by the AO, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(Appeals), NFAC on 7.1.2020. In the meanwhile, there was change in the management set up and assessee lost the track of the appeal filed. The CIT(A), NFAC sent multiple notices u/s. 250 of the Act seeking written submissions, however since no response was filed, the order u/s. 250 was passed on 26.6.2023 based on information available on record dismissing the appeal. Therefore, he requested that the assessee may be given a chance for representing its case before the CIT(Appeals), to which the ld. DR opposed and submitted that the CIT(A) before passing the order issued notices on various dates to which the assessee did not respond, therefore the CIT(A) was bound to pass the ex parte order on the basis of material available on record.

3.

Considering the rival submissions, we note that the appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(Appeals) is against the order u/s. 154 and the explanation given by the assessee and in the Statement of Facts for non-representing the case is bonafide, therefore, as per our considered opinion and in the interest of justice, a chance should be given to the assessee to represent its case with necessary documents before the CIT(Appeals). Accordingly, we restore the matter back to the CIT(Appeals) for fresh decision as per law, after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is directed to file necessary documents for substantiating its case and not seek unnecessary adjournment for early disposal of the case.

4.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Pronounced in the open court on this 11th day of October, 2023.

More judgments on Section 154

All 8,676 judgments and leading authorities on Section 154 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →