THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING FEDERATION LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal acknowledged that the assessee did not respond to notices sent through the portal but was not served with physical notices. Considering the assessee's unfamiliarity with the procedures, the Tribunal felt that one more opportunity should be granted.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeals were filed against the orders of CIT(A) which were ex-parte. The assessee claimed that various records were placed before the AO but not considered, and deposits during demonetization were not accepted. The assessee also stated that they were not well-versed with the procedures and did not receive physical notices.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex-parte order of CIT(A) is liable to be set aside due to lack of proper notice and opportunity to the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.
to 309/Bang/2024 The Karnataka State Co-operative Housing Federation Ltd., Bangalore Page 2 of 3 the procedures. Hence, they were not able to respond to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). The assessee further submitted that all the issues are directly covered in favour of the assessee and if one more opportunity is granted, they will appear before the ld. CIT(A) and satisfy him about the claim made by the assessee.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly, in this case, the ld. CIT(A) had sent four notices through the portal for which the assessee had not responded. It is also a fact that the assessee was not served with any physical notice. Considering their submissions that they are not well versed with the systems and procedures and therefore, they were not able to respond before the ld. CIT(A) we feel that one more opportunity may be granted to the assessee and therefore, we hereby set aside the ex-parte order of the ld. CIT(A) and remit the issue in dispute to his file for deciding the issue afresh on merits in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th Apr, 2024
More judgments on Section 80P(2)(a)(i)
- Duddukuru Primary Agricultural Cooperative… vs ITO, Ward - 1, TadepalligudemITA 258/VIZ/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2015-16
- Parthasaradhi Mutually Aided Co-Operative… vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward-17(1), HyderabadITA 2322/HYD/2026[AY 2016-17]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026
- The Development Multipurpose Credit &… vs ITO Ward 2 (4), Porbandar, GujaratITA 458/RJT/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hislop College Employees Cooperative Credit… vs ITO Ward 2(3), NagpurITA 184/NAG/2026[2018-19]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Jijamata Mahila Gramin Bigar Sheti Sahakari… vs ITO Ward -1, BhandraITA 102/NAG/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed12 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
