IGOOR SEVA SAHAKARA SANGHA NIYAMITHA ,KODAGU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, MADIKERI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1369/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 August 2024AY 2017-183 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's non-appearance was not due to their fault, as notices were sent to an email address they had explicitly requested not to be used. Therefore, the case was remanded to the CIT-A for a fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee did not appear before the CIT-A despite receiving notices via email. However, the assessee had specified in their appeal form that no communication should be sent to that email address.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT-A erred in proceeding ex-parte when notices were sent to an email address the assessee had requested not to be used for communication.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV

For Appellant: Shri S.V Ravishankar, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel
Hearing: 19.08.2024Pronounced: 26.08.2024

PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 24/06/2024 vide DIN No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065986424(1) for the assessment year 2017-18.

2.

At the outset, it was noticed that the assessee did not appear during the proceedings before the learned CIT-A despite the fact that several notices were issued by the learned CIT-A intimating the date of hearing. All the notices were issued by the learned CIT-A at the email ID given by the assessee in form No. 35 submitted in the appeal. However, on perusal of the relevant column of form 35 where the email ID was furnished by the assessee, we note that it was clearly specified that no communication should be sent to the email id. Nevertheless, all the notices were issued by the learned CIT-A through the email only. Thus, we are of the view that non-appearance before the learned CIT-A cannot be attributed to the default of the assessee. As such we are of the view that there was sufficient reason for the assessee which prevented him for non-response of the notices issued by the ld. CIT-A. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we are inclined to extend one more opportunity to the assessee to represent his case before the ld. CIT-A. It is also directed that the assessee shall not seek any adjournment without just cause. It is equally important to note that the learned AR of the assessee at the time of hearing before us has also undertaken the responsibility for the necessary compliance before the ld. CIT-A. Thus, in view of the above, we set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT-A for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. Hence the ground of appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes.

3.

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →