ELLAPPA RANGNATHAN ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 562/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 November 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K (Judicial Member)5 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged the assessee's status as a senior citizen and the undertaking for future compliance. In the interest of justice, the case was set aside to the AO for fresh adjudication, granting one more opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a senior citizen, failed to appear for assessment proceedings due to not receiving notices, claiming an outdated email ID was on record. A fresh email ID was provided, and an application for additional evidence was filed.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted a fresh opportunity for adjudication given the ex-parte assessment order and the assessee's claim of not receiving notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K

For Appellant: Shri Deepesh Wagle, CA
For Respondent: Shri Balusamy N, JCIT (DR)
Hearing: 15.10.2025Pronounced: 04.11.2025

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the NFAC, Delhi vide order dated 03/07/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1066371218(1) for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly submitted that both the assessment order and the order of ld. CIT(E) are ex-parte to the assessee. According to the ld. AR, the assessee is a super Sr. citizen who could not keep a tract on the notices issued by the authorities below. It was also pointed out that it is also not known to Page 2 of 3 the assessee whose email.id was furnished in the Income Tax Return and in the appeal field before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR also submitted that now a fresh email.id has already furnished in Form – 36 which belongs to the Auditor of the assessee so as to keep a proper watch on the necessary communication.

3.

The ld. AR also filed application for the admission of the additional evidences so as to address the issue raised by the revenue authorities. The ld. AR further assured to make necessary compliance before the AO and, therefore, requested to remit the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law.

4.

On the other hand, the ld. DR submitted that the necessary opportunities intimating the date of hearing to the assessee have already been granted to the assessee but the assessee failed to avail the same. As per the ld. DR the assessee should not be granted fresh opportunity.

5.

We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Considering the age of the assessee being super Sr. citizen and the undertakings given by the ld. AR for the assessee for making the necessary compliances, we, in the interest of justice and fair play deem fit it to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to represent his case before the AO. Accordingly, we set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes.

Page 3 of 3 5.1 It is also pertinent to note that all future correspondence by the AO should be directed at the email.id given in form 36, memo of appeal, as prayed by the ld. Counsel for the assessee and extracted below: deepeshwagle@gmail.com 6. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in court on 4th day of November, 2025

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →