SANTOSH NAIK,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, MANDYA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 195/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 April 2025AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV (Judicial Member)3 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 found that the assessee's inability to appear before the CIT(A) was due to bona-fide reasons and set aside the order. The matter was restored to the AO for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to appear before the Assessing Officer (AO) and the CIT(A), leading to ex-parte assessment and appellate orders. The assessee's AR claimed non-appearance was due to notices being delivered to the spam folder.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case on merits due to non-appearance caused by technical reasons?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV

For Appellant: Shri Nagaraja KH, CA
For Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)
Hearing: 26.03.2025Pronounced: 22.04.2025

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 09/12/2024 vide DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2024-25/1071021551(1) for the assessment year 2018-19.

2.

At the outset, it is observed that the assessee neither appeared before the Assessing Officer (AO) during the assessment proceedings nor before the Ld. CIT(A) during the appellate stage. Consequently, both the assessment and the first appellate order were passed ex parte.

3.

Before us, the Ld. Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that the non-appearance before the Ld. CIT(A) was due to the fact that the notices issued by NFAC were inadvertently delivered in the spam folder of the assessee’s email account and thus remained unnoticed. It was contended that this was the sole reason for non-compliance, and the assessee may be granted another opportunity to present its case on merits. The Ld. AR also undertook the responsibility for the necessary compliance and ensure due cooperation during the proceedings. It was further submitted that since the assessment is the exparte order, the matter may be remanded back to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. This request was made to ensure proper opportunity of being heard is provided in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

4.

On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not raise any objection to the request of the assessee for setting aside the matter to the file of the AO for de novo adjudication as per law.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In the interest of substantial justice, and considering that the assessee was unable to appear before the ld. CIT-A due to bona-fide reasons as claimed, we find it appropriate to set aside the matter to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication. The assessee is directed to fully cooperate in the proceedings and not seek undue adjournments. Accordingly, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set . aside and the matter is restored to the file of the AO to decide the issue afresh, after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

6.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →