SRI. SURESH KALBURGI SHANKAR,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-5(1)(1)1, BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 456/BANG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 August 2023AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the non-appearance before the CIT(A) was due to a reasonable cause and not intentional. Therefore, the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh consideration with an opportunity for the assessee to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was decided ex-parte due to the non-pursuit of the appeal by their assigned counsel. The assessee submitted an affidavit explaining the reasons for this failure, citing a lack of response from their counsel.

What were the issues?

Whether the ex-parte decision of the CIT(A) was justified, and if there was a reasonable cause for the assessee's failure to appear before the lower appellate authority.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 54,Section 54F,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri G.S Prashanth, C.A
Hearing: 23.08.2023Pronounced: 23.08.2023

Date of hearing : 23.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 23.08.2023 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 21/04/2023 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide DIN No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052246678(1) u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act for the asst. year 2017-18 , challenging the denial of exemption u/s 54/54F of the Act.

2.

At the outset, the ld.AR submitted that the case was decided by the ld.CIT(A) ex-parte for not pursuing the appeal. He further submitted that the assessee has filed an Affidavit stating the reasons for not pursuing the appeal. The assessee had assigned the work to M/s Guruswamy and Associates and email address of M/s Guruswamy and Associates was also mentioned in the appeal but the concerned counsel did not pursue the appeal before the CIT(A). The non appearance before the CIT(A) was neither intentional nor deliberate nor the mala fide and there exists a reasonable cause for such failure. Therefore, he requested that the matter may be sent back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

3.

The ld.DR relied on the order of the lower authorities.

4.

Considering the rival submissions and reasons for not pursuing the appeal before the CIT(A) as per Affidavit submitted by the assessee, we notice that the counsel did in not respond to the hearing notices, therefore the CIT(A) decided the appeal ex parte on the basis of materials available before him. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we send back this issue to the file of CIT(A) for fresh consideration and assessee shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The assessee is directed to substantiate his case with relevant documents and avoid unnecessary adjournment for early disposal of the case.

5.

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

Order pronounced in court on 23rd day of August, 2023

More judgments on Section 54

All 1,745 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →