FIS SOLUTIONS (INDIA) GRATUITY TRUST,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

Aggrieved with the intimation order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A). The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without deciding the grounds on merits due to the failure on the part of the assessee to submit its response to the deficiencies pointed out by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) by observing as under : “2. Proceedings: - Deficiency notice has been issued as under citing the shortcoming in the filing of the appeal: S Date hearing Date of Date of Mail id to which the notices issued No. notice compliance response have been delivered as per Income- fixed tax portal 1 20/12/2024 26/12/2024 No reply Sandeep. Bacchuwar@fisglobal.com Kajal.Chodankar@fisglobal.com

Despite granting sufficient time and opportunity to the appellant to cure these deficiencies, no response has been filed, nor the deficiencies has been cured within the stipulated period. The failure to rectify the deficiencies constitutes a breach of procedural requirements essential for the proper presentation of the appeal. Therefore, this appeal cannot be concluded in its present form.

Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto.

The Ld. AR at the outset submitted that the assessee had filed the requisite details/documents, however, the Ld. Addl./ JCIT(A) has not considered the submission of the assessee and dismissed the appeal for want of compliance with the filing requirements without deciding the issues on merits. He also submitted that the non-compliance before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) was not intentional. The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) issued only one deficiency notice via email to two employees of the assessee. The first email id was of one Mr. Sandeep who left the job and the second person Kajal who did not receive the deficiency letter. He further submitted that a very short span of time was afforded by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) to submit response to the said notice. The notice was issued on 20.12.2024 which was a Friday followed by 21st and 22nd December, 2024 being Saturday and Sunday. 25th December, 2024 was also a holiday because of Christmas. So practically, 23rd and 24th December, 2024 were the only two days which were available to the assessee to reply. FIS Solutions India Pvt. Ltd. is engaged in software solutions, most of the employees of the company were generally on leave because of their customers having Christmas holidays worldwide. Thus, even if the notice would have been received by the assessee, it was practically impossible to furnish response in two days time. He also laid emphasis on the fact that the return was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act without issuing notice u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act indicating any proposed adjustment CPC intended to make to the returned income. Further, the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has not decided the issues on merits of the case. He admitted that the assessee inadvertently used section 4 AY 2013-14 10(23C) in drop-down menu as section 10(25) was not available (in drop-down menu) while filing ITR 7. But this mistake is not fatal to deny the exemption, which is otherwise available to an approved gratuity fund and as such the assessee is entitled to exemption u/s 10(25)(iv) of the Act. Relying on Circular No. 14 dated 11.04.1955, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. AO is bound to give necessary relief to which the assessee is entitled to. He submitted that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the relevant details/ documentary evidence before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) to his satisfaction. He, therefore, requested that in the interest of justice the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) may be set aside and the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)/JAO for adjudication afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The Ld. DR had no objection to the above request of the assessee.

We have heard the Ld. Representatives of the parties, perused the material available on record and the Paper Book filed by the Ld. Counsel on behalf of the assessee. Perusal of the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) reveals that he dismissed the appeal of the assessee because of non-filing of response to the notice issued by him requiring the assessee to cure the deficiencies contained therein. The Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) has not decided the appeal on merits of the case. We find that only one notice was issued by the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) which was not received by the assessee for the reason mentioned in the preceding paragraph. The assessee was also not granted sufficient time to respond to the notice. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that given an opportunity the assessee is in a position to substantiate its case by filing the requisite details/ documents before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)/JAO and therefore he has requested for remand of the matter to his file for fresh adjudication.

Considering the totality of facts and in the circumstances of the case enumerated above, without going into the merits of the appeal, we deem it proper, in the interest of justice, to set aside the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for adjudication afresh and pass speaking order on merits as per fact and law after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to provide the requisite support in terms of submitting the relevant documents/ evidence as may be required/called upon on the appointed date and make his submissions without seeking any adjournment under any 5 AY 2013-14 pretext, failing which the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order as per law. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.

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