M/S. SOHAMASAA SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 6(1)(2), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 277/BANG/2023Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 May 2023AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal, while deprecating the assessee's lack of response, restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication in the interest of justice. The CIT(A) was directed to issue fresh notices and consider the assessee's submissions.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed for non-prosecution due to a failure to respond to online notices. The assessee claimed this was an oversight and requested the matter be restored.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal for non-prosecution without adjudicating on merits, and if the assessee should be granted another opportunity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri. Chandrashekarappa K, CA
For Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Hearing: 18.05.2023Pronounced: 18.05.2023

O R D E R

Per George George K, Judicial Member :

1.

This appeal at the instance of assessee is directed against the order of Nawtional Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, dated 13.01.2023 passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called ‘the Act’). The relevant Assessment Year is 2013-14.

2.

At the outset, we notice that the appeal before the CIT(A) has been dismissed for non-prosecution, without adjudicating on merits. The learned AR submitted that notices for filing the written submission were sent online and the assessee by mistake did not take note of the same. Therefore, it was prayed in the interest of justice and equity, the issue raised in appeal may be restored to the files of the CIT(A).

3.

The learned Standing Counsel supported the orders of the AO and CIT(A).

4.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Several notices were issued by CIT(A)’s office through registered email ID for the assessee to submit the details and written submissions. Since there was no response to the notices issued, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limini. We strongly deprecate the assessee for not responding to the notices issued by CIT(A)’s office. However, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that one more opportunity should be provided to the assessee for proper representation of the case. Hence, the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The CIT(A) is directed to issue a fresh notice and take on record the written submissions of the assessee before a decision is rendered in the matter. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue for furnishing the written submissions and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments in the matter. It is ordered accordingly.

5.

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

Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →