What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal granted the assessee's request for another opportunity. The case was remitted back to the AO to pass an order after hearing the assessee.

The assessee failed to comply with notices issued by the NFAC, leading to an ex-parte assessment order by the AO and confirmation of that order by the NFAC. The assessee's representative requested another opportunity due to the assessee's lack of education and knowledge of the ITBA portal.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC erred in confirming the ex-parte assessment order without providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. Whether the assessee should be granted a further opportunity to present their case.

Shri. Satish Panduranga vs ITO | ITAT Bangalore 2023

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

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri Vidhyadhar, A.R

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Hearing: 07.06.2023Pronounced: 07.06.2023

PER BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal by assessee is directed against order passed by NFAC u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] for the assessment year 2017-18 dated 28.2.2023. 2. Facts of the case are that the ld. AO passed the assessment order by ex-parte on 21.12.2019, wherein he made addition of Rs.6,29,94,000/- during the financial year 2016-17. Against this assessee filed appeal before NFAC. The NFAC fixed the case for hearing as follows:

M/s. Satish Panduranga, Bangalore

Page 2 of 3 S.No. Hearing notice Hearing date Remarks dated 1 Notice dated 15.01.2021 Request for 2.1.2021 adjournment 2 Notice dated 16.01.2023 No compliance 10.1.2023 3 Notice dated 23.01.2023 Form 35, 17.01.2023 Grounds of appeal

, copy of challan filed

4. Notice dated 30.01.2023 No compliance 24.1.2023 2.1 There was no compliance from the assessee’s end. Hence, the NFAC confirmed the order of AO passed u/s 144 of the Act. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. The ld. A.R. submitted that assessee is not well educated and having no knowledge of Income Tax ITBA portal and hence, the assessee has not complied certain notices issued by the NFAC. The ld. A.R. requested for one more opportunity to present the assessee’s case before NFAC.

2.2 We accede to the request of ld. Counsel for the assessee. Accordingly, we remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of AO to pass an order after hearing the assessee.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 7th June, 2023

Sd/- Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) (Beena Pillai) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated 7th June, 2023. VG/SPS

M/s. Satish Panduranga, Bangalore

SHRI. SATISH PANDURANGA,BANGALORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2)(1), BANGALORE

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments