BHARTIYA GRUHA SAMASYA NIWARAN SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

Date of Hearing – 30/09/2024 Date of Order – 22/10/2024

O R D E R PER K.M. ROY, A.M.

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the impugned order dated 17/01/2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2013–14.

2. The assessee has raised following grounds:–

“1. That this is a appeal filed against the order passed by CIT(A)-3 which is passed on 17/01/2024 having DIN and Order no- ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1059815991(1) Then ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1059817529(1)Then ITBA/ APL/S/250/2023-24/1059816629(1) Where the order for years 2013-14,2014- 15,2016-17 passed by DCIT/ACIT where challenged the appellate is challenging all three orders of CIT(A) passed on 17/01/2024 for year 2013- 14,2014-15,2016-17.

2 Bhartiya Gruha Samasya Niwaran Sanstha ITA no.192/Nag./2024 That the appellant Manoj Gopichand Gedam is (existing member) of trust Bhartiya Gruha Niwaran Sanstha bearing no-F-3116(N). Dhiraj Gopichand Gedam who was president who is dead who was previous appellant in the appeal before DCIT/ACIT. That the assessing office/tax officers who during inspection got sale deed made by trust and on the basis of which tax was leveled for year 2013-14, 2014-15, and 2016-17 of amount of Rs 600,45,510 which was under challenge before CIT(A)-3 court that all these sale deeds were made by Ishwarsingh Chandel and suresh telang who posed to be the member of trust the year during which these sale deeds were made they were not the members of the trust they were no one and had nothing to do with the affairs of the trust and they without the permission of the charity commissioner made these sale deed and committed fraud.

4. Also there is judgment of high court justice Rohit b deo dated 5/01/2021 para 10,11,12 it is specifically mentioned that this a fraud committed by suresh telang and all sale deed are invalid in eyes of law.

dead the existing member of the trust Manoj Gopichand Gedam has proceeded in all civil and criminal matter and also the present appeal before this tribunal. All three orders dated 17/01/2024 the CIT (A) reject the appeal only on the grounds of non–prosecution and none attendance and also said that notices were served but all the notices were sent on the address which was given by - previous president Dheeraj Gedam on old address which is Satya Vihar Tathagat Gautam Buddha Marg which is also mentioned in form 35 which is old address new address of appellate Manoj Gopichand Gedam is Plot no.27-B Pratabnagar Road Near Vishal Petrol pump Mate Chowk Nagpur and his phone no is 9975765676 and his email id is manoj.gedam2255@gmail.com also the old email address is of Dheeraj Gedam which was given in form 35 the present appellate did not know about the proceedings of the appeal court and hence he did not appear hence a fair chance needs to be given to the appellate also he is a laymen and don't know much about legal proceedings hence it is humble request to this tribunal to allow this appeal and remand back the matter or decide the matter on merits. That the appellate also prays to exempt the fee or any penalty or condition amount for filing this appeal as the appellate is a member and the trust he is not at all in position to pay any fee as this fraud was committed and the trust is penniless has no money. The appellate reserves its rights to all add new parties and also to amend the present appeal also he will file new documents as and when required. The ground of appeal filed in CIT(A)-3 should also be observed before this tribunal. That no notice was served by the income tax office authority to the present appellate/applicant Manoj Gedam it was for the first time that the appellate came to know that the appeal was rejected which was in month of feb 2024. The appellate himself came to the office of income tax and came to know that the appeal was rejected. Prayer-

1. Hence it is humbly prayed to this court to permit Manoj Gopichand Gedam to proceed with the present appeal.

2. That to remand back the matter to the appropriate income tax court or to decide the matter.

3. Stay further any proceeding of income tax officials of attachment of disputed property during the pendency of civil criminal and proceedings before charity commissioner and stay any further proceedings of recovery of income tax penalty.

4. Consider these new grounds in appeal as mentioned in present application.

6. Exempt the fee or any penalty or condition amount needed to file this appeal.

7. Grant any other relief as the court feels appropriate.”

4 Bhartiya Gruha Samasya Niwaran Sanstha ITA no.192/Nag./2024

3. While going through the material available on record, we find that there was complete non–representation by the assessee before the learned CIT(A) despite granting several opportunities to the assessee to represent its case and ultimately, the order passed by learned CIT(A) is an ex-parte order. The learned Authorised Representative prayed for granting one opportunity by restoring the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) to enable him to substantiate its case. The learned Departmental Representative has vehemently opposed the submissions of the assessee. Having heard both the parties, therefore, we are of the opinion that by following the principles of natural justice, one more opportunity should be given to the assesse to substantiate his case before the learned CIT(A). In view of the above, the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is set aside and remit the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) and direct him to adjudicate the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. It is also directed that the assessee should not seek adjournment without there being a justified reason. Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.