AMALA CANCER HOSPITAL SOCIETY,THRISSUR vs. ACIT(E), KOCHI

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a co-operative society registered under the Kerala State Co-operative Societies Act formed for the purpose of rendering medical services to the public. The return of income for the assessment year 2012-2013 was filed on 08th March, 2013 declaring `Nil’ income. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (“the AO" hereinafter) vide order dated 16th March, 2015 passed u/s.143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” hereinafter) at a total income of . Amala Cancer Hospital Society. Rs.22,05,112. While doing so, the AO made addition of corpus donation of Rs.15,99,916 and determined the total income in a normal commercial manner.

Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order dismissed the appeal ex parte.

Being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before me, in the present appeal. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the AO had adopted the application of income as gross receipts of the assessee-society. Therefore, the matter may be remitted to the file of the AO.

The learned Senior Departmental Representative submits that no interference in the impugned order is called for.

I have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. At the outset, I find that the CIT(A) passed an ex parte order after issuing notices through ITBA Portal. Perusal of the order of the CIT(A), it would be clear that the notices of hearing were issued through ITBA portal. In my considered opinion, it is not a valid method and manner of service of notice as specified under the provisions of sec.282(1) of the Act and Rule 127(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Therefore, it is crystal clear that the notices were not served upon the assessee. It is pertinent to make a reference to a decision rendered by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship v. CIT (Exemptions) (2024) 463 ITR 560 (P&H), wherein the Hon’ble High . Amala Cancer Hospital Society. Court after making reference to the provisions of sec.282(1) held that service of notice through ITBA portal is not valid service and remanded the matter to the file of AO for de novo disposal of the appeal.

Respectfully following the above judgment of the Hon’ble High Court, we remand the matter back to the file of CIT(A) with a direction to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

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