MR. BALARAM CHOPRA, ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(2)(3) , BENGALURU

PDF · subscribers
ITA 556/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 May 2024AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal observed that the assessee, not well-versed in online proceedings, failed to notice the notices and respond. Consequently, the issue of granting deduction under Section 54F was remitted back to the NFAC for reconsideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal is against an NFAC order for AY 2017-18. The assessee claimed lack of knowledge of the ITBA portal led to missing notices from NFAC, despite multiple opportunities provided.

What were the issues?

Whether the NFAC erred in its order without proper opportunity to the assessee and if the matter needs to be remanded for reconsideration of deduction u/s 54F due to the assessee's lack of familiarity with online procedures.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 54F

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

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

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Appellant: Smt. Sunaiana Bhatia, A.R
Hearing: 27.05.2024Pronounced: 27.05.2024

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by assessee is directed against order of NFAC for the assessment year 2017-18 dated 27.2.2024. The assessee has raised various grounds of appeal: 2. At the time of hearing, ld. A.R. has made a plea that NFAC has given opportunity to the assessee to furnish the submissions as follows: “During the appeal proceedings, notices under section 250 of the Income Tax Act on 6.6.2020, 26.2.2021, 8.6.2022, 23.8.2022, 20.10.2022 and 21.04.2023 with the respective case postings to 10.3.2020, 15.03.2021, 17.6.2022, 07.09.2022, 27.10.2022 and 21.04.2023. Vide these notices the appellant was asked to furnish submissions in support of the grounds of appeal along with supporting documentary evidence(s) and/or documents as specified in the attached Annexure.”

3. However, the assessee has not availed the above opportunities as the assessee was very poor knowledge in ITBA portal and at no Mr. Balaram Chopra, Bangalore Page 2 of 2 time assessee noticed these notices sent by the NFAC by e-mail. In our opinion, assessee is not well versed in the online proceedings followed by the NFAC and it failed to take notice of the various notices issued by the NFAC. In our opinion, it is appropriate to remit the entire issue in dispute with regard to granting of deduction u/s 54F of the Act once again. Accordingly, the issue in dispute is remitted to the file of NFAC for reconsideration.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th May, 2024

More judgments on Section 54F

All 2,628 judgments and leading authorities on Section 54F →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →