← Back to search

SRI TIPPESWAMY TRADING COMPANY ,BYADGI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, HAVERI

PDF
ITA 1149/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 October 20253 pages

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHODHRY & SHRI WASEEM AHMEDAssessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R Chandrashekar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Hearing: 13.08.2025Pronounced: 09.10.2025

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC,
Delhi vide order dated
15/05/2023
in DIN
No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052837060(1) for the assessment year
2016-17. 2. We have heard the learned AR and the learned DR. We have also perused the affidavit explaining the delay in filing the appeal and the materials placed on record.
Page 2 of 3

.
2.1
The assessee explained that the appeal could not be filed in time because the consultant,
Shri
Virupanna
Amberkar,
Chartered
Accountant, was unwell for a long period and later passed away on 21-
08-2024. Due to this reason, the assessee did not receive proper communication regarding the appellate proceedings before the ld.
CIT(A). The assessee came to know about the ex-parte order only when the bank account was attached on 04-03-2025. Immediately thereafter, steps were taken to obtain the papers from the erstwhile Tax Advocate and file the appeal.

2.

2 The delay of 688 days, in our view, was occurred due to sufficient and reasonable cause. The illness and subsequent demise of the consultant were circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. The delay is therefore condoned.

2.

3 On merits, the order of the learned CIT(A) has been passed ex- parte without proper participation of the assessee. In the interest of justice, we deem it fit to set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication, after giving reasonable opportunity to the assessee to present his case. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 3. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 9th day of October, 2025 (NARENDER KUMAR CHODHRY) Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 9th October, 2025

/ vms /
Page 3 of 3

.
Copy to:

1.

The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file

By order

Asst.

SRI TIPPESWAMY TRADING COMPANY ,BYADGI vs INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, HAVERI | BharatTax