TRUSTEES UCO BANK EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 50(1),, KOLKATA

PER SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless
Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] dated
21.08.2025, arising out of the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust running its operations under the name and style of Trustees of UCO Bank
Employees Provident Fund. It manages and maintains provident fund

2
Trustees Uco Bank Employees Provident Fund contributions of employees. In the present case, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under Section 147 of the Act and framed the assessment under Sections 144 and 144B of the Act vide order dated 16.12.2024. In the said order, the Assessing Officer made various disallowances and declined certain deductions and claims in computing the total income under the normal provisions of the Act.
3. Aggrieved by the said assessment, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). However, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal ex parte, thereby sustaining the additions made by the Assessing Officer.
4. Dissatisfied with the above order assessee is in appeal before this tribunal. At time of hearing the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee did not get a proper opportunity to present its case before the CIT(A). It was explained that the notices issued by the CIT(A) were sent to an incorrect e-mail address, due to which they went into the spam/junk folder of the assessee’s mailbox.
Consequently, the assessee could not appear or file necessary documents in support of its claims.
5. It was further submitted that the assessee is in possession of all supporting documents and prayed that one more opportunity be given to substantiate its case before the AO in the interest of justice.
6. The learned DR, while supporting the orders of the lower authorities, fairly submitted that if the Bench is inclined to grant another opportunity, the assessee may be directed to cooperate in the appellate proceedings and comply with notices issued by the authority concerned.
7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is evident that the CIT(A) disposed of the appeal

3
Trustees Uco Bank Employees Provident Fund ex parte without verifying whether the assessee had been duly served with notices at the correct address or not. In view of the explanation offered by the assessee and considering the principle of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee deserves one more opportunity to present its case before the AO.
8. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of Assessing Officer with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh in accordance with law, after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to extend full cooperation and promptly respond to all notices issued by the authority.
9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 13.11.2025 (Rakesh Mishra) (Sonjoy Sarma)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Dated: 13.11.2025
AK, Sr. P.S.

Copy of the order forwarded to:
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. Pr. CIT
4. CIT(A)

////
By order