ARJUN SOUHARDHA PATHINA SAHAKARI NIYAMITHA,BANGALORE V. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

ITA 2170/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves multiple appeals by Arjun Souhardha Pathina Sahakari Niyamitha against the orders of the CIT(A), which were initially dismissed due to the non-appearance of the assessee. The assessee's representative argued that this was due to notices going into the spam folder of the registered email, leading to unawareness of the proceedings. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances and the affidavit provided, decided to grant a fresh opportunity for the assessee to present its case, emphasizing the need for strict compliance with procedural requirements in future hearings.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 842178 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-02-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 30-09-2025
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BALUSAMY N
• Assessee Lawyers: SAHANA THM
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2165, 2166,2168,2169,2170,2171/2025 Assessment Years – 2016-17, 2017-18, 2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 & 2022-23 Arjun Souhardha Pathina Sahakari Niyamitha, No.88, 1st Floor Jeerpge Bldg, 11th Cross Malleshwaram, Bengaluru – 560 003. PAN – AADAA 2035 P Vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Ms. Sahana THM, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Balusamy N, JCIT Date of hearing : 04.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 25.02.2026 O R D E R PER BENCH: These appeals are filed by the assessee against the respective orders passed by the Ld. CIT(A). Since the issues involved in all the appeals are identical, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2165, 2166,2168,2169,2170,2171/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 4 . ITA No. 2165/Bang/2025 2. At the outset, we note that the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed by conforming to the order of the AO due to the non- appearance of the assessee. As a result, the Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer without adjudicating the issues on merits. 3. Before us, the Ld. Authorized Representative submitted that the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) through the ITBA portal had gone into the spam folder of the assessee’s registered email ID and, therefore, the assessee was not aware of the appellate proceedings. It was submitted that the non-appearance was not deliberate. To this effect, the ld. AR has filed the affidavit dated 16-02-2026 of the assessee in support of his contention. Accordingly, the Ld. AR requested that the matter be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication and undertook the responsibility on behalf of the assessee to ensure proper and timely compliance with all notices and directions to be issued by the Ld. CIT(A). 4. On the other hand, the Ld. Departmental Representative opposed the request and submitted that the assessee was negligent in pursuing the appeal. Hence, the ld. DR supported the order of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. We observe that the appeal was disposed of without examining the issues on merits. In the interest Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2165, 2166,2168,2169,2170,2171/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 4 . of justice and fair play, we are of the view that one final opportunity should be granted to the assessee to present its case. However, the assessee is directed to strictly comply with all notices and directions to be issued by the Ld. CIT(A) and not to seek unnecessary adjournments. The undertaking given by the Ld. AR is duly recorded. It is made clear that failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the directions of the Ld. CIT(A) may result in dismissal of the appeal without further opportunity. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file for fresh adjudication on merits, in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. ITA Nos. 2166 to 2171/Bang/2025 7. Coming to the other appeals bearing ITA Nos. 2166 to 2171/Bang/2025, we find that the facts and issues involved are identical to those in ITA No. 2165/Bang/2024. Therefore, for the reasons stated above, these appeals are also set aside to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, in accordance with law, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. The assessee is similarly directed to make necessary compliance, and the undertaking of the Ld. AR for ensuring compliance shall apply to these appeals as well. Failure to comply with the directions of the Ld. CIT(A) may result in dismissal of Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 2165, 2166,2168,2169,2170,2171/Bang/2025 Page 4 of 4 . the appeals without further opportunity. Hence, all the grounds of appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the combined results, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 25th day of February, 2026 Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 25th February, 2026 / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore Printed from counselvise.com "