THE KARNATAKA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING FEDERATION LTD,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE
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.
Held
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.
Key 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.
Sections Cited
250, 80P(2)(a)(i), 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.
PER BENCH:
These appeals are filed against the orders of CIT(A) passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “The Act”) which were filed against the ex-parte orders of the assessing officer in which the deduction claimed u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act was disallowed and addition made u/s 68 of the Act. 2. It is the case of the assessee that various records were placed before the ld. AO but he has not considered the same and the deposits made during the demonetization period was also not accepted and additions were made on that score. 3. The assessee submitted that they have not verified the communication sent by the ld. CIT(A) about the hearing and no manual notices were sent to the assessee and also in view of the fact that the appeal is a faceless appeal, they were not well versed with
ITA Nos.307 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. 4. 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. 5. 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
Sd/- Sd/- (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) (Soundararajan K.) Accountant Member Judicial Member
Bangalore, Dated 30th Apr, 2024. VG/SPS
ITA Nos.307 to 309/Bang/2024 The Karnataka State Co-operative Housing Federation Ltd., Bangalore Page 3 of 3
Copy to:
The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 5 Guard file By order
Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.
