CHANDAVARA RAMAKRISHNA SHIVASHANKAR ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(5), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1190/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 August 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY (Judicial Member), SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remand the case back to the Ld. Commissioner for a fresh decision, subject to the Assessee depositing Rs. 11,000/- and complying with future notices.

What were the facts?

The Assessee appealed against an order that dismissed their appeal in limine, without considering the merits, which was filed against an assessment order. The dismissal was due to non-compliance with notices.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal dismissed in limine without merits, due to non-compliance with notices, should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH “SMC”, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY & SHRI WASEEM AHMED

Hearing: 14.08.2025Pronounced: 14.08.2025

Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member:

This appeal has been preferred by the Assessee against the order dated 03.03.2025, impugned herein, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Center (NFAC)/ Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short Ld. Commissioner) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’) for the A.Y. 2018-19.

2.

In this case, admittedly the Ld. Commissioner vide impugned order dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine and without touching upon the merits of the case, filed against the assessment order dated 20.09.2021 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act and thus considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality, for just and proper decision of the case, equitable relief, fairplay and substantial justice, and considering the non-compliance to the notices issued by the Ld. Commissioner, we are inclined to remand the instant case to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh, however, subject to deposit of Rs.11,000/- in the Revenue Department under “other heads” within 15 days of the date of this order and while affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the Assessee.

3.

We also deem it appropriate to direct the Assessee to comply with the notices to be issued by the Ld. Commissioner and file the relevant submissions and documents as would be essentially required for proper and just decision of the case.

4.

We also clarify that in case of subsequent default, the Assessee shall not be entitled for any leniency. Thus the case is remanded to the file of the Ld. Commissioner for decision afresh accordingly.

5.

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 14.08.2025.

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →