MURALI KRISHNAN,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE - 1(2), BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITITA 2913/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 April 2026AY 2022-235 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remit the entire issue in dispute back to the file of the CIT(A) for a fresh decision in accordance with law. The reasoning was based on the interest of justice, equity, and fair play, acknowledging the assessee's request for another opportunity. The Tribunal emphasized that a reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee was directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the CIT(A) and submit necessary documents. The Tribunal also cautioned that in case of further default, the assessee would not be entitled to any leniency. The ratio is that procedural lapses leading to non-representation, if genuinely demonstrated, can warrant a remand for a fresh adjudication, provided the assessee cooperates in the subsequent proceedings.

What were the facts?

The appeal is filed by the assessee, Murali Krishnan, against the order of the CIT(A), Bengaluru-12, dated 22.10.2025, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2022-23. The assessee's representative before the ITAT contended that all communications from the CIT(A) went to the email spam folder, preventing the assessee from representing the case. Consequently, the assessee sought another opportunity before the CIT(A). The ITAT noted that the assessee had been provided eight opportunities by the CIT(A) but neither appeared nor filed submissions, leading the CIT(A) to dismiss the appeal, inferring the assessee was not aggrieved by the assessment order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, in the interest of justice and equity, the assessee should be granted one more opportunity to represent his case before the CIT(A), considering the contention that communications were missed due to email spam. (Question of mixed law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Contentions: Assessee: Argued that all communications from the CIT(A) were diverted to the email spam folder, preventing the assessee from appearing or filing submissions. Therefore, in the interest of justice and equity, a fresh opportunity should be granted before the CIT(A). Revenue: The judgment records no specific argument from the revenue regarding this issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

Hearing: 12.02.2026Pronounced: 20.04.2026

PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A), Bengaluru-12 dated 22.10.2025 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2025-26/1081921222(1) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) for the assessment year 2022-23.

2.

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:

IT(IT)A No.2913/Bang/2025 Murali Krishnan, Bengaluru Page 2 of 5

IT(IT)A No.2913/Bang/2025 Murali Krishnan, Bengaluru Page 3 of 5

IT(IT)A No.2913/Bang/2025 Murali Krishnan, Bengaluru Page 4 of 5

3.

Before us, both the parties fairly conceded that the assessee could not represent his case before the ld. CIT(A), Bengaluru-12. The ld. A.R. of the assessee contended that all the communication of the ld. CIT(A) went to the email spam folder and therefore, the assessee could not represent his case before the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly prayed that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity may be granted before the ld. CIT(A).

4.

On going through the order of ld. CIT(A), we observed that the assessee, despite providing 8 opportunities before the ld. CIT(A), neither appeared nor filed any written submission in respect of grounds of appeal and statement of facts. The ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee by holding that the assessee is not aggrieved with the assessment order and therefore he is not interested in prosecuting the same and accordingly dismissed the appeal of the assessee. This being so, in the interest of justice, equity and fair play and as requested by the ld. A.R. of the assessee, we deem it fit and proper to remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide afresh in accordance with law. Needless to say, a reasonable opportunity of being heard must be granted to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) and submit all the necessary documents/records/information in support of his contention. We make it clear that in case of further default, the assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. It is ordered accordingly.

IT(IT)A No.2913/Bang/2025 Murali Krishnan, Bengaluru Page 5 of 5

5.

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

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th Apr, 2026

Sd/- Sd/- (Waseem Ahmed) (Keshav Dubey) Accountant Member Judicial Member

Bangalore, Dated 20th Apr, 2026. VG/SPS

Copy to:

1.

The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order

Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →