HORTICULTURAL PRODUCERS COOPERATIVE MARKETING AND PROCESSING SOCIETY LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BENGALURU
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the first appellate authority (FAA) was decided ex parte because the assessee did not comply with notices for written submissions. The appeal migrated to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), and the assessee claims hearing notices were not received.
Held
The Tribunal acknowledged that the appeal was decided ex parte and that the assessee claimed non-receipt of hearing notices from NFAC. In the interest of justice and equity, the Tribunal decided to provide the assessee with another opportunity.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration on merits due to ex parte decision and alleged non-receipt of notices.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K. & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU
Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member This appeal is filed by the assessee against the DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055022181(1) dated 10.08.2023 of the CIT(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [NFAC], for the AY 2020-21.
ITA No.98/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 3
At the very outset, we noticed that the appeal of the assessee before the first appellate authority (FAA) has been decided ex parte. The reason for deciding the appeal by the FAA ex parte was that several notices issued from the Office of the first appellate authority for filing written submission was not complied with by the assessee.
The learned AR submitted that the appeal had migrated to National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) and the hearing notices issued were never received by the assessee. In the interest of justice and equity, the learned AR submits that the matter may be restored to the files of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration on merits.
The learned Departmental Representative supported the order of the A.O. and the CIT(A).
We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The appeal of the assessee migrated to NFAC. It is stated by the learned AR that the hearing notice issued by NFAC were not received by the assessee. In the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that one more opportunity ought to be provided to the assessee. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration and decision as per law. The assessee is directed to co-operate with the Revenue and shall not seek adjournments in the matter without any valid reasons. It is ordered accordingly.
ITA No.98/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 3
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Pronounced in the open court on this 22nd day of March, 2024.
Sd/- Sd/- ( GEORGE GEORGE K. ) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU ) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Bangalore, Dated, the 22nd March, 2024. /Desai S Murthy / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order
Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore.
