THE MAMATHA CONSUMERS COOPERATIVE CNETRAL STORES LIMITED,MANCHERIAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MANCHERIAL

The brief facts of the case are that the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) initiated proceedings u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by issuing notice u/s.148 of the Act to the assessee. However, the assessee did not file the Return of Income (“ROI”) in response to the said notice. The assessee also failed to respond to subsequent notices issued during the assessment proceedings. Consequently, the Ld. AO passed the assessment order u/s.147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act on 30.03.2024. ITA Nos.1360 & 1361/Hyd/2024 3

Aggrieved by the order of Ld. AO, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 105 days. The Ld. CIT(A), without condoning the delay dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) submitted that, the assessee could not receive the notices sent by the Ld. AO due to change in their address. It was also submitted that, no e-mail corresponding to the notices was also sent to the assessee. In support of their claim, the Ld. AR placed on record copies of down loaded communications from the IT Portal, from which it was demonstrated that no specific recipient e-mail address was mentioned in the system generated e-mail. The Ld. AR further submitted that, although the assessment order was passed by Ld. AO on 30.03.2024, it was actually received by the assessee on 29.07.2024. By that time, the Manager who was managing the tax matters of the assessee was seriously ill. In support of their submission, the Ld. AR invited our attention to page no.5 of the order of Ld. CIT(A), where the petition for condonation of delay filed by the assessee has been captured by Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. AR also invited our attention to page nos.8 & 9 of the order of Ld. CIT(A) for A.Y. 2016-17, wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has captured the certificate issued by hospital regarding the illness of the Manager. Thus, it was submitted by Ld. AR that the delay

1 We also found that the assessee could not prosecute his case, before the Ld. AO due to non-receipt of notices issued by the Ld. AO. Now, the assessee is ready to co-operate and furnish the necessary details with the Ld. AO to prosecute their case on merits. Therefore, we are of the view that one more opportunity ought to be granted to the assessee in the interest of substantial justice. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld. AO and restore the issue to the file of Ld. AO with a direction to afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard and to pass a fresh assessment order in accordance with law, after duly considering the documents filed by the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no.1360/Hyd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. The issue involved in this appeal is similar to the issue involved in ITA no.1360/Hyd/2024. Therefore, our discussion and findings in ITA no.1360/Hyd/2024 shall apply mutatis mutandis in this appeal also. Accordingly, this appeal of the assessee is also allowed for statistical purposes.

To sum up, both the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 4th April, 2025. (VIJAY PAL RAO) (MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

The Mamatha Consumers Co-operative Central Stores Limited, 5-247, Sahakara Bhavan, Opp. Bus Stand, Mancherial-504 208 2. ITO, Ward-1, Mancherial. 3. Pr. CIT, Hyderabad. 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. Guard File.