Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a Limited Liability Partnership firm, is in appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2021-22. The CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order without providing sufficient opportunity to the assessee, allegedly due to notices being sent to an incorrect email address.
Held
The Tribunal held that the assessee was not provided with sufficient opportunity to plead its case before the CIT(A) and restored the issues related to quantum addition and penalty to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, allowing the appeals for statistical purposes.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred by passing an ex-parte order without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, and if so, whether the matter should be remanded.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A BENCH,
Before: Dr. MANISH BORAD & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA
आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:- These appeals at the instance of assessee are directed against the order for A.Y. 2021-22 framed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act dated 28.01.2025 and 05.02.2025 framed by Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi which are arising out of assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act dated 28.12.2022 and penalty order u/s 270A of the Act dated 26.05.2023. 2. We note that the assessee has challenged the quantum addition in and penalty u/s 270A of the Act for A.Y. 2021-22 in .
At the outset Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that inspite of granting proper opportunity and sufficient time to furnish the details, Ld. CIT(A) has passed the ex-parte order on merits of the case. Prayer made for providing one more opportunity so that assessee can file the relevant details and submissions in support of the grounds challenging the quantum addition and penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act.
On the other hand Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently argued supporting the order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC.
We have heard rival contentions and perused the record placed before us. The assessee is a Limited Liability Partnership firm (LLP) incorporated on 08.07.2015. Business loss of Rs.31,84,54,759/- has been claimed in the return of income for A.Y. 2021-22 on 15.03.2022. The assessee firm is engaged in the business of providing training and recruitment services to the individuals and other companies and operates a platform to learn skills that are needed for technology jobs. After the case being selected for scrutiny under CASS assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Act on 13.07.2022 making additions of Rs. 16,79,28,757/- and assessing a loss at Rs. 15,05,26,002/- Penalty proceedings u/s 270A also initiated. Dissatisfied with the additions made by the Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) assessee preferred appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but on the date of hearing fixed on 07.10.2024, 25.10.2024 and 24.01.2025 there was no & 831/PUN/2025 response by the assessee on the ITBA system. Only once on 13.11.2024 assessee seeked adjournment. Before us Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the notices not attended by the assessee were actually sent on a wrong e-mail Id i.e. abhimanyu@interviewbit.com in place of the correct e- mail Id i.e. ganesh@scaler.com. Considering this fact and that the assessee being not provided with sufficient opportunity to plead its case before Ld. CIT(A), we deem it appropriate to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeal raising legal grounds as well as on merits to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication and to decide in accordance with law after duly considering the submissions of the assessee. Needless to mention that proper opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. Assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Accordingly grounds of appeal
raised in is allowed for statistical purposes.
1. 6. So far as 270A of the Act on the additions made in the hands of assessee for A.Y. 2021- 22. Penalty u/s 270A of the Act is dependant on the quantum additions which in the instant case have been challenged in the and has been restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A), therefore the issues raised in appeal challenging the penalty levied u/s 270A of the Act being consequential also remitted back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for afresh adjudication for which assessee shall be provided fair opportunity of being heard. is also allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result both the appeals & 831/PUN/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes as per the terms indicated herein above.
Order pronounced on this 20th day of August, 2025.