KARAVALI SOUHARDA CREDIT CO OPERATIVE LIMITED,DAVANAGERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAVANAGERE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 67/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 March 2024AY 2017-18Bench: Shri George George K (Vice President), Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu (Accountant Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating on merits. In the interest of justice and equity, the Tribunal decided to grant one more opportunity to the assessee by restoring the issues to the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was directed against the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2017-2018. The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal ex parte because the assessee failed to file written submissions, allegedly due to notices being diverted to the spam folder of their email.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal ex parte without adjudicating on merits, and whether the assessee should be granted another opportunity to present their case.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES “A”, BANGALORE

Before: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Hearing: 12.03.2024Pronounced: 12.03.2024

O R D E R

Per George George K, Vice-President :

1.

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 13.11.2023 passed u/s.250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” hereinafter). The relevant assessment year is 2017-2018.

2.

The assessee had filed adjournment application. However, it was noticed that the CIT(A)’s order is ex parte. The learned AR who present was directed by the Bench to explain as to why assessee did not represent before the CIT(A). The learned AR submitted that the assessee was not aware of the notices issued from the Office of the first appellate authority as the same could have settled in the spam folder of the assessee’s e-mail. The learned AR submitted in the interest of justice and equity matter may be restored to the files of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →