UNITERN ADVISORS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BANGALORE
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.Assessment Year : 2022-23
PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of NFAC,
Delhi dated 24/12/2024 in respect of the A.Y. 2022-23. 2. The assessee filed this appeal with a delay of 83 days and filed an application to condone the said delay. The assessee submitted that the Company’s accountant was fully engaged in furnishing the details to the department in connection with the search proceedings. Therefore the Page 2 of 3
hearing notices sent to the email ID of the said accountant was not followed up and therefore the assessee was not able to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and in effect, an ex-parte order was passed by the Ld.CIT(A).
We have considered the said submissions and also perused the email ID given in form 35 as well as in form 36 and accepted the reasons stated by the assessee and condoned the delay of 83 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal.
We have also perused the assessment order which is also an ex-parte order made u/s. 144 of the Act. The assessment was reopened based on the ground that large turnover but the books of accounts were not audited. We have also considered the reason adduced by the assessee for the non- appearance before the Ld.CIT(A).
The main reason for the non-appearance before the Ld.CIT(A) was that the company’s accountant was very much busy with the furnishing of the details to the authorities in connection with the search proceedings. Further, the email ID mentioned in form 35 also relates to the accountant who has not viewed the email in view of the reasons as stated above. Therefore the assessee has no knowledge about the appeal hearings. The reasons stated by the assessee for the non-appearance before the Ld.CIT(A) may be a genuine one but the fact remains that the assessee had not responded to the notice issued by the AO also. Therefore the AO had made a best judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the Act. The said fact would establish that the assessee was not vigilant in the income tax proceedings. The reasoning given by the assessee also seems to be a genuine one and, in that circumstances, we are of the view that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee. We, therefore set aside the order of the authorities below and remit this issue to the file of the AO for denovo consideration, after hearing the assessee. We also direct the assessee to pay a sum of Rs 10,000/ by way of cost to the Income Tax Department and produce the receipt before the AO at the time of assessment proceedings.
Page 3 of 3
6. The assessee is also directed to cooperate with the department for the early completion of the assessment. We also direct the AO to send the communications to the email ID mentioned in form 36 which is as follows:
navin@unitern.com
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28th August, 2025. (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU)
Judicial Member
Bangalore,
Dated, the 28th August, 2025. /MS /
Copy to:
1. Appellant
Respondent 3. CIT
DR, ITAT, Bangalore
Guard file
CIT(A)
By order