Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a University, declared 'NIL' income claiming exemption under Section 10(23C) for AY 2018-19. Due to the Covid pandemic, the University was closed, and it could not provide requested details to the Assessing Officer, leading to an ex-parte assessment order with additions.
Held
The Tribunal noted that the assessee faced difficulties due to the pandemic and that the Ld. DR did not object to restoring the matter. The Tribunal restored the case to the Assessing Officer for de-novo consideration.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte assessment and appeal orders were justified given the circumstances, and if the matter should be restored for fresh consideration?
Sections Cited
10(23C), 144
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. BRR KUMAR & SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL
(Assessment Year: 2018-19) Swarnim Gujarat Sports University Vs. Income Tax Officer, Opp. Taluka Seva Sadan Desar, Ward-1 (Exemption), Nr. Valavav Cross Road, At. Post- Ahmedabad Desar, Taluka, Desar, District- Vadodara-391774 [PAN No.AAALS4041F] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Manoj Kumar Makhania, C.A. Respondent by: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT DR 19.02.2025 Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 25.02.2025 O R D E R
PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi vide order dated 18.07.2024 passed for A.Y. 2018-19.
The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:-
“1. The Commissioner Income Tax (Appeal), National Faceless Appeal Centre was not justified in passing ex-parte order defying natural justice to the appellant.
2. On facts and under the circumstances of case as well as in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC was not justified in passing ex-parte order dismissing the appeal of the appellant on the ground that the appellant has been given proper opportunities and is not aggrieved with the assessment order impugned herein and is not interested in prosecuting the same.
Swarnim Gujarat Sports University vs. ITO(Exemp.) Asst.Year –2018-19 - 2– 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC is not justified in holding that the assessee was not entitled to the exemption of Rs. 4,73,55,430/- under section 10(23C) of the Act.
Without prejudice to the above, the CIT-(A), NFAC dismissed the appeal without dealing with even basic facts of the matter.
It is therefore, prayed that the CIT-(A), NFAC not having dealt with any of the grounds of appeal
in the right earnest the matter may be restored to the file of the CIT-(A), NFAC.
6. Your appellant reserves his right to add, amend, alter, and/or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing of the appeal.”
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed it’s return of income for A.Y. 2018-19 on 31.10.2018, declaring total income at Rs. “NIL” claiming exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act. The assessee received notices dated 27.01.2020, 21.01.2021, 26.02.2021 and 19.03.2021 with a request to provide certain details as called for. However, due to Covid pandemic, the University was closed and the office accountant of the assessee was unavailable. The assessee was unable to submit the requested documents as called for by the Assessing Officer. Subsequently, the assessee furnished the documents and explanation on 22.04.2021, however, by that time the Assessing Officer had passed the assessment order inalizing the assessment under Section 144 of the Act after making addition of Rs. 4,73,55,430/-.
4. In appeal, Ld. CIT(A) observed that despite multiple opportunities to the assessee, no submissions were filed by the assessee. Accordingly, Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
5. The assessee is in appeal before us, against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(A).
Swarnim Gujarat Sports University vs. ITO(Exemp.) Asst.Year –2018-19 - 3– 6. Before us, the Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee is a University and is entitled to claim of exemption under Section 10(23C) of the Act. However, due to unavoidable circumstances, since the office of the assessee was closed during the Covid pandemic period, it was unable to comply with various notices issued by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was requested that in the interest of justice, the matter may be restored to the file of Assessing Officer for de-novo consideration.
In response, Ld. D.R. has also not objected to the matter being restored to the file of Assessing Officer, in the interest of justice and also looking into the quantum of additions made in the hands of the assessee.
Accordingly, looking into the instant facts, in the interest of justice, the matter is hereby restored to the file of Assessing Officer for de-novo consideration after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order is pronounced in the Open Court on 25/02/2025
Sd/- Sd/- (DR. BRR KUMAR) (SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 25/02/2025 TANMAY, Sr. PS TRUE COPY आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��थ� / The Respondent. संबंिधत आयकर आयु� / Concerned CIT 3. 4. आयकर आयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,