M/S. GSK BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), , BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 605/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 June 2024AY 2018-19Bench: the ld. AO the assessee was deprived of proper opportunity of hearing in view of the Covid period during the course of assessment proceedings as the1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessment order was passed during the COVID period and the NFAC order was ex-parte, with the assessee facing difficulties with the ITBA portal. Considering these circumstances and in the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to remit the issue back to the AO for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed their return of income for AY 2018-19 declaring Rs.70,55,410/-. The AO made an addition of Rs.45,69,511/- by disallowing 5% of total expenditure. The assessee appealed to NFAC, which issued notices but received no response, leading to an ex-parte order confirming the AO's addition. The assessee argued they were deprived of a hearing due to the COVID period and ITBA portal issues.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of hearing due to the COVID-19 pandemic and ITBA portal challenges, and whether the ex-parte order by NFAC should be set aside for fresh consideration.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 143(3),Section 144B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV

For Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Hearing: 26.06.2024Pronounced: 26.06.2024

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by assessee is directed against ex-parte order of NFAC for the assessment year 2018-19 dated 21.2.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”).

2.

The assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 2018-19 on 31.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs.70,55,410/-. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide order dated 19.5.2021, wherein the ld. AO made total addition of Rs.45,69,511/- by disallowing 5% on total expenditure. Against this assessee went in appeal before NFAC. NFAC given notice to the assessee on 15.12.2023, 28.12.2023, 5.1.2024 and 29.1.2024. There was no response from the assessee. Hence, NFAC confirmed the order of ld. AO ex-parte. Against this assessee is in appeal before us.

M/s. GSK Builders and Developers, Bangalore Page 2 of 2 3. The ld. A.R. submitted that even before the ld. AO the assessee was deprived of proper opportunity of hearing in view of the Covid period during the course of assessment proceedings as the assessment order was passed on 19.5.2021. The assessee was not well versed with the ITBA portal and the assessee was not able to avail the given opportunities by NFAC. Hence, he prayed that one more opportunity of hearing may be given at the end of the ld. AO.

4.

The ld. D.R. strongly opposed the argument of assessee’s counsel.

5.

After considering the argument of both the parties, we are of the opinion that there is a force in the argument of ld. A.R. as the assessment order was passed on 19.5.2021, which was Covi period, thereafter order of NFAC was also ex-parte. Being so, in the interest of justice, we remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of ld. AO for fresh consideration.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 26th June, 2024

More judgments on Section 144B

All 10,521 judgments and leading authorities on Section 144B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →